HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
KARI SHAMEEM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
Office Notes,
reports, orders or proceedings
SL. Dat or directions
No. e and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures 2026:UHC:314
WPCRL No.6 of 2026
Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J.
Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the Petitioner.
2. Mr. Vipul Painuly, learned AGA, for the State of
Uttarakhand/1 and 2.
3. Mr. A.K. Beniwal, learned counsel for the Respondent
No.3.
4. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the Case Crime No.546 of 2023, under Sections 323, 354, 376, 377, 498-A and 506 of IPC, and under Sections ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, at Police Station Gang
Nahar, District Haridwar.
5. Parties are present in person before this Court, who are duly identified by their learned counsel respectively. After interacting with the parties, it seems that the parties do not wish to carry the matter further and have settled their disputes amicably. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds grounds are sufficient for allowing
the compounding applications.
6. Learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the
compounding application.
7. Today, the matter is listed for dispo
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.