DEEPAK SINGHAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A charge-sheet has been filed against the applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 394, 504, 506 IPC.

(2.) Compounding application, being CLMA no. 2063 of 2014, has been filed by the parties to indicate that they have buried their differences and have settled their dispute amicably. Joint compromise has been filed alongwith affidavits of Deepak Singhal (one of the applicants) and Mohd. Hanif (complainant-respondent no. 2).

(3.) It is the statement of learned counsel for respondent no. 2 that respondent no. 2 is no more interested in prosecuting the applicants, in as much as the dispute between the parties has been resolved amicably. Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 stated that respondent no. 2 may be permitted to compound the offences alleged against the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicant has affirmed the said statement of learned counsel for respondent no. 2.