Quashed

Navneet Kaushik v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC27 Apr 2022C482/511/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous application to quash proceedings initiated under sections 323, 427, 452, 504, and 506 IPC. The court dismissed the challenge to the charge-sheet and summoning order, decreeing the quashing of the case and proceedings based on a confirmed amicable settlement between the petitioner and the respondents.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the charge-sheet dated 14.12.2021, summoning order dated 17.03.2022, and proceedings of the case.

Navneet Kaushik Vs State of Uttarakhand — Uttarakhand HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Criminal Misc. Application No. 511 of 2022

¶3

Navneet Kausik and another …........ Petitioners

¶4

Vs.

¶5

State of Uttarakhand and others …..... Respondents

¶6

Present : Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Subhash Tyagi Bhardwaj, Deputy Advocate General for the State/respondent no.1. Mr. Vishwa Prakash Bahuguna, Advocate for respondent nos.2 to 4.

¶7

JUDGMENT

¶8

Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

¶9

The challenge in this petition is made to the charge-sheet dated 14.12.2021, summoning order dated 17.03.2022, passed in Criminal Case No.1791 of 2022, State vs. Navneet Kaushik and another, under Sections 323, 427, 452, 504, 506 IPC, pending by the court of 6^th Additional Civil Judge/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Dehradun (for short, “the case”) and the entire proceedings of the case on the basis of amicable settlement between the parties. A joint compounding application has been filed supported by affidavits.

¶10

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶12

Learned counsel for the parties would submit that the parties have amicably settled the dispute and they are staying in peace and harmony. Therefore, the matter may be settled accordingly.

¶13

The petitioner, as well as the respondent no.2 (the informant) and the other victims including the respondent nos.3 and 4 have joined the proceeding through video conferencing, as identified by their respective counsel. Parties have accepted the compromise.

¶14

The parties have settled the dispute amicably. Therefore, having considered the nature of offence and all the attending factors, this Court is of the view that it is a case which may be decided on the basis of amicable settlement between the parties. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be allowed.

¶15

The petition is allowed. The charge-sheet dated 14.12.2021, summoning order dated 17.03.2022 and the proceedings of the case are hereby quashed.

¶16

¶17

7. Compounding application stands disposed of

¶18

accordingly.

¶19

(Ravindra Maithani, J.)

¶20

27.04.2022

¶21

Sanjay

Navneet Kaushik v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Navneet Kaushik v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukul Sukhija Vs State of Uttarakhand

Praveen Dhama Alias Dumpy Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohan Lal Vs State of Uttarakhand

Doothnath Alias Dudhnath Vs State of Uttarakhand

Ayushman Kaushik Vs State of Uttarakhand

Pritam Singh Alias Ranveer Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand