VIMLA DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER
LAWS(UTN)-2013-4-144
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on April 30,2013

VIMLA DEVI Appellant
VERSUS
State of Uttarakhand and another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) By way of present application / petition, moved under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the applicant seeks to quash the chargesheet filed against her in criminal case no. 387 of 2007, State vs. Smt. Vimla Devi, pertaining to case crime no. 35 of 2007 under Section 420 of IPC, police station Kankhal, District Haridwar, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar.
(2.) On an FIR lodged by respondent no. 2 Smt. Surjeet Kaur against the applicant on 08.02.2007 in police station Kankhal under Section 420 of IPC, investigation of the case started. After investigation, a chargesheet under Section 420 of IPC was submitted by the IO against the accused-applicant, which was registered as case crime no. 35 of 2007, cognizance was taken on the said chargesheet and the accused was summoned to face the trial for the said offences. Aggrieved against the same, the accusedapplicant moved this application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
(3.) A compounding application is moved on behalf of learned counsel for the parties, which is taken on record. It is prayed that the parties have entered into compromise and have settled their disputes amicably. It is prayed that the proceedings of criminal case no. 387 of 2007, State vs. Vimla Devi under Section 420 of IPC in police station Kankhal, District Haridwar be quashed, as the matter is civil in nature. An affidavit of applicant Vimla Devi is filed in support of the fact that compromise (Annexure 1 to compounding application) took place between the parties and the matter is amicably settled. It is submitted by learned counsel for the parties that continuation of the proceedings before the court below will be sheer abuse of process of law and no useful purpose will be served by keeping the said proceedings pending. A notarized compromise deed (Annexure 1 to the compounding application) is filed which indicates the terms of settlement between the parties. Respondent no. 2 Surjeet Kaur and applicant Vimla Devi are the signatories to the said compromise. It is mentioned in the compromise of settlement dated 15.12.2012 that the parties are withdrawing the cases pending against each other. A reference of this case is also given in the terms of settlement and it was mentioned that Surjeet Kaur (first party) is not interested to prosecute Vimla Devi (second party).;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.