Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 3259
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
SANJAY PRAKASH PAINYULI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
C482 859 / 2022
SL. N o .
D a t e
Office N ot e s, r e por t s, or de r s or pr oce e din gs or dir e ct ion s a n d Re gist r a r ’s or de r w it h Sign a t ur e s
COURT’S OR JUD GE’S ORD ERS
C- 482 No. 859 of 2022 H on’ble Ashish N a it ha ni, J. Mr. Karan Singh Dugt al, learned counsel for t he Applicant s. 2. Mr. N.S. Kanyal, learned A.G.A. for t he St at e of Ut t arakhand. 3. Mr. Lalit Miglani, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Pankaj Kum ar Sharm a, learned counsel for t he Respondent No. 2. 4. The present applicat ion under Sect ion 482 of t he Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of t he Applicant s against Respondent No. 2 – Sm t . Babit a Painyuli, seeking quashing of t he ent ire proceedings of Crim inal Case No. 2895 of 2019, “ St at e vs. Sanj ay Painyuli and Anot her ” ( arising out of Case Crim e No. 297 of 2018) , under Sect ions 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I PC and Sect ion 3/ 4 of t he D.P. Act , pending before t he Court of t he learned Judicial Magist rat e, Dehradun, I Vt h Addit ional Chief during t he pendency of t he pr esent crim inal m iscellaneous applicat ion. 5. Applicant and Respondent No. 2 are present before t his Court and are duly ident ified by t heir respect ive counsels. Upon int eract ion, Respondent No. 2 subm it s t hat she is residing wit h t he Applicant and has no obj ect ion t o t he allowing of t he Com pounding Applicat ion. As t he disput e arises out of m at rim onial discord, t he part ies have am icably resolved t heir differences. 6. I n light of t he legal principles laid down by t he Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. St at e of Punj ab, ( 2012) 10 SCC 303, and Dim pey Guj ral vs. Union Territ ory of Chandigarh, Transfer Pet it ion ( Crim inal) No.
115 of 2012, decided on 06.12.2012, t his Court holds t hat cr im inal proceedings m ay be quashed where t he part ies have am icably set t led t he m at t er and are inclined t o rest ore peace and harm ony. 7. Per cont ra, t he learned St at e Counsel has obj ect ed t o t he Com pounding Applicat ion. 8. Considering t he overall fact s and circum st ances of t he case, t his Court is of t he v iew t hat t he ends of j ust ice would be m et by quashing t he ent ire proceedings of Crim inal Case No. 2895 of 2019, “ St at e vs. Sanj ay Painyuli and Anot her”, for t he offences punishable under Sect ions 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I PC and Sect ion 3/ 4 of t he D.P. Act , P.S. Nehru Colony, Dist rict Dehradun, pending before t he Court of t he learned I Vt h Addit ional Chief Judicial Magist rat e, Dehradun. Accordingly, t he Com pounding Applicat ion is 9. allowed. The ent ire proceedings of Crim inal Case No. 2895 of 2019, “ St at e vs. Sanj ay Painyuli and Anot her”, for t he offences punishable under Sect ions 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I PC and Sect ion 3/ 4 of t he D.P. Act , P.S. Nehru Colony, Dist rict Dehradun, pending before t he Court of t he learned I Vt h Addit ional Chief Judicial Magist rat e, Dehradun, are hereby quashed qua t he present Applicant s only. 10. The Crim inal Miscellaneous Applicat ion filed under Sect ion 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly disposed of. ( Ash ish N a it ha n i, J.) 2 5 .1 1 .2 0 2 5 Shiksha
