AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Prafulla C. Pant, J.—Heard.
A compounding application has been filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 2, and the Petitioners.
Also, counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State. Same be taken on record.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, and learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 pleaded before this Court that the impugned criminal proceedings have arisen out of matrimonial dispute between Nidhi Mishra (daughter of Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Respondent No. 2), and her husband Surendra Diwedi. Smt. Nidhi Mishra and Rajesh Kumar Mishra (Respondent No. 2) both identified by their counsel, are present in court. They stated that they do not want to prosecute any of the accused in the criminal proceedings after amicable settlement between the parties to matrimony.
In the above circumstances, in view of principle of law laid down in B.S. Joshi and Others Vs. State of Haryana and Another, , the compounding application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, same is allowed. The petition u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure., is also allowed. Impugned proceedings of criminal case No. 435 of 2011,State v. Rajkumari and others, 3 relating to offence punishable u/s 498A IPC, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, are hereby quashed. (Urgency application No. 2424 of 2011, stands disposed of).