MANISH ANEJA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A charge -sheet was submitted against the applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Section of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) A compounding application, being CLMA no. 1158 of 2014, is filed by the parties to indicate that they have buried their differences and have settled their dispute amicably. A joint compromise is filed on behalf of the parties alongwith affidavits of applicant no. 1 and respondent no. 2. The terms of settlement have been given in paragraph no. 7 of the affidavit filed by applicant no. 1.

(3.) SMT . Annu Aneja (respondent no. 2 herein) is present in person before the Court, duly identified by her counsel Mr. B.D. Pande, who stated that she is no more interested in prosecuting the applicants. She is in receipt of a demand draft of Rs. 14 lacs, which is given to her by learned counsel for the applicants in the Court. Applicant no. 1 Manish Aneja is also present in person before the Court, duly identified by his counsel Mr. J.S. Virk. He also affirmed the terms of settlement, as also the fact that he and respondent no. 2 have sorted out their differences amicably.