AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Prafulla C. Pant, J.—Heard.
Learned Counsel for the parties state that complainant has entered into compromise with the 2 Petitioners Anil Kumar Kansal and Puneet Kansal, and he does not want to prosecute the Petitioners.
It is a case of 420 IPC, which was registered after an application was moved by Respondent No. 2 u/s 156(3) Code of Criminal Procedure
Application No. 70 of 2011, has been moved on behalf of the Petitioners and Respondent No. 2 before this Court supported by affidavit stating that the parties have entered into compromise , and as such, the trial of the Petitioner No. 1 Anil Kumar Kansal and Petitioner No. 2 Puneet Kansal be quashed.
In view of the principle of law laid down in Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another, , considering the fact that the parties have entered into compromise, this petition u/s 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is disposed of with the direction that the impugned trial as against the Petitioners Anil Kumar Kansal and Puneet Kumar Kansal is quashed. However, the trial court may proceed against third accused Suman Kumar who is facing trial in the same criminal case No. 1904 of 2009, pending before the Chief Judicial 3 Magistrate, Haridwar. (Stay application No. 1136 of 2010, and compounding application No. 70 of 2011, stand disposed of).