Disposed

Sanjay Prakash Painyuli v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC25 Nov 2025C482/859/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Section 482 Cr.P.C. application sought quashing of a matrimonial criminal case under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The parties settled their differences and the complainant raised no objection; relying on Gian Singh and Dimpey Gujral, the Court allowed the compounding application and quashed the proceedings qua the applicants.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2895 of 2019 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act quashed qua applicants; compounding application allowed.

SL.
No
.
Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
directions and
Registrar’s order
ith Sintr

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

w gaues

C-482 No. 859 of 2022
Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J.
Mr. Karan Singh Dugtal, learned counsel for the
Applicants.
2.
Mr. N.S. Kanyal, learned A.G.A. for the State of
Uttarakhand.
3.
Mr. Lalit Miglani, learned counsel holding brief of
Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the
Respondent No. 2.
4.
The present application under Section 482 of the
Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the Applicants against
Respondent No. 2 – Smt. Babita Painyuli, seeking
quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.
2895 of 2019, “State vs. Sanjay Painyuli and Another”
(arising out of Case Crime No. 297 of 2018), under
Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4
of the D.P. Act, pending before the Court of the learned
IV^thAdditional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun,
during
the
pendency
of
the
present
criminal
miscellaneous application.
5.
Applicant and Respondent No. 2 are present
before this Court and are duly identified by their
respective counsels. Upon interaction, Respondent No.
2 submits that she is residing with the Applicant and
has no objection to the allowing of the Compounding
Application. As the dispute arises out of matrimonial
discord, the parties have amicably resolved their
differences.

6.
In light of the legal principles laid down by the
Hon’ble Apex Court in_Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab_,

(2012) 10 SCC 303, and_Dimpey Gujral vs. Union_
Territory of Chandigarh, Transfer Petition (Criminal) No.

115 of 2012, decided on 06.12.2012, this Court h	olds
that criminal proceedings may be quashed where	the
parties have amicably settled the matter and	are
inclined to restore peace and harmony.
7. Per contra, the learned State Counsel objected to the Compounding Application. 8. Considering the overall facts and circumstance	has s of
the case, this Court is of the view that the end	s of
justice would be met by quashing the en	tire
proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2895 of 2019, “S	tate
vs. Sanjay Painyuli and Another”, for the offe	nces
punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and	506
IPC and Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act, P.S. Nehru Col	ony,
District Dehradun, pending before the Court of	the
learned IV^th Additional Chief Judicial Magistr	ate,
Dehradun.
9. Accordingly, the Compounding Application	is
allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case 2895 of 2019, “State vs. Sanjay Painyuli and Anoth	No. er”,
for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A,	323,
504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act,	P.S.
Nehru Colony, District Dehradun, pending before	the
Court of the learned IV^thAdditional Chief Jud	icial
Magistrate, Dehradun, are hereby quashed qua	the
present Applicants only. 10. The Criminal Miscellaneous Application filed u Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly disposed of. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 25.11.2025 Shiksha	nder

115 of 2012, decided on 06.12.2012, this Court h

olds

that criminal proceedings may be quashed where

the

parties have amicably settled the matter and

are

inclined to restore peace and harmony.

7.
Per contra, the learned State Counsel
objected to the Compounding Application.
8.
Considering the overall facts and circumstance

has
s of

the case, this Court is of the view that the end

s of

justice
would
be
met
by
quashing
the
en

tire

proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2895 of 2019, “S

tate

vs. Sanjay Painyuli and Another”, for the offe

nces

punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and

506

IPC and Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act, P.S. Nehru Col

ony,

District Dehradun, pending before the Court of

the

learned
IV^th
Additional
Chief
Judicial
Magistr

ate,

Dehradun.

9.
Accordingly, the Compounding Application

allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case
2895 of 2019, “State vs. Sanjay Painyuli and Anoth

No.
er”,

for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A,

323,

504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act,

P.S.

Nehru Colony, District Dehradun, pending before

the

Court of the learned IV^thAdditional Chief Jud

icial

Magistrate, Dehradun, are hereby quashed qua

the

present Applicants only.
10.
The Criminal Miscellaneous Application filed u
Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly disposed of.
(Ashish Naithani, J.)
25.11.2025
Shiksha

nder

Sanjay Prakash Painyuli v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Prakash Painyuli 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohd Faiz Vs State of Uttarakhand

Saleem Ahmad Vs State of Uttarakhand

Rahul Sharma Vs Diwakar

Sumit Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Uttarakhand

Amit Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand