Gaurav Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar's order with Signatures COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS

C482/49/2020

Gaurav Kumar and another --Applicants Versus State Of Uttarakhand and another --Respondents

Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.

Mr. Abhishek Verma, learned counsel for the applicants.

¶2Mr. V.S. Rawat, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶3Mr. Rajendra Arya, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

¶4The applicants Gaurav Kumar and Smt. Pragati, are present through video conferencing. They are identified by Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate.

¶5Smt. Suman Rana, the respondent no.2, is present through video conferencing. She is identified by Mr. Rajendra Arya, Advocate.

¶6The applicants have filed this Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for the following reliefs :-

"It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash/ set aside the impugned charge sheet 5.11.2018, summoning order dated 14.8.2019 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.358/2019 (Case Crime no. 331/2018) U/S 420, 406,323, 504, 506 IPC PS Rishikesh District Dehradun pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Rishikesh District Dehradun.

It is further prayed that during the pendency of present criminal misc. application, the further proceedings of Criminal Case No.358/2019 (Case Crime no. 331/2018) U/S 420, 406,323, 504, 506 IPC PS Rishikesh District Dehradun pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Rishikesh District Dehradun may kindly be stayed or else the applicants shall suffer irreparable loss and

injury."

¶7During the pendency of the instant criminal application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the applicants and respondent no.2 have come to an amicable settlement and they have filed a Compounding Application (IA No. 4 of 2026).

¶8An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the informant / respondent no. 2, Smt. Suman Rana, wherein it has been stated that the applicants and respondent no. 2 have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise. As per the terms of the compromise, respondent no. 2 has agreed to withdraw the allegations against the applicants and has no objection to the compounding of the offences in so far as they relate to the applicants.

¶9It is further stated that the matter was purely monetary in nature, and the applicants and respondent no. 2 / informant have settled the dispute out of court and have also sorted out their money dispute. After entering into the aforementioned compromise, respondent no. 2 does not want to prosecute the applicants further.

¶10On an interaction with respondent no. 2, Smt. Suman Rana, duly identified by her counsel, she has stated that the matter has been settled and she does not want to pursue the matter any further.

¶11An affidavit has also been filed in support of the compounding application on behalf of applicant no. 1 and applicant no. 2, and they have also similarly stated that the applicants and respondent no. 2 have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise. It has also been mentioned that the matter was purely monetary in nature and the applicants and respondent no. 2 / informant have settled the dispute out of court and have also sorted out the money issue.

¶12On an interaction with applicant no. 1 and no. 2, who are duly identified by their learned counsel, Mr. Abhishek Verma, they have also made a similar

averment that the matter has been settled with respondent no. 2 and thus request that the matter be decided in terms of the compromise and the compounding application be allowed.

¶13Mr. V.S. Rawat, learned A.G.A. for the State submitted that offences under Sections 420, 323, 504, and 506 are compoundable, however, offence under Section 406 of IPC can be compounded only with the permission of the Court. Since the parties have entered into a compromise and they want to bury their differences, hence, it would be in the interest of justice that the matter be compounded.

¶14Since the matter has already been resolved between the parties, hence, it will be a futile exercise to let the matter go for trial against the applicants.

¶15Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the Compounding Application deserves to be allowed.

The Compounding Application is accordingly allowed.

¶16As a consequence thereof, the impugned charge-sheet dated 05.11.2018, summoning order dated 14.08.2019 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 538 of 2019, State Vs. Smt. Pragati and others, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Rishikesh, District Dehradun under Sections 420, 406, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC, are hereby quashed.

¶17The present criminal Misc. Application is disposed accordingly.

¶18Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.

(Siddhartha Sah, J.)

13.08.2026 Shiv/