MAHESH NATH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A charge -sheet has been filed against the applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) A compounding application, being CRMA no. 1396 of 2014, is filed on behalf of the complainant and accused -applicants to indicate that they have buried their differences and have settled their dispute amicably. Compounding application is supported by the affidavits of applicant no. 3 and respondent no. 2.

(3.) RESPONDENT no. 2 is present in person before the Court duly identified by his counsel Mr. J.S. Bisht. Respondent no. 2 says that he is not interested in prosecuting the applicants, in as much as, the applicants and he himself are close relatives and have resolved their dispute amicably. [Respondent no. 2 was the complainant, who lodged the first information report regarding 'dowry death' of his daughter]. Applicant no. 3 is also present in person before the Court duly identified by his counsel Mr. Sandeep Tandon. He also affirms what is stated by respondent no. 2 in the Court today.