VINOD SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of present Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 the applicants seek to quash the charge sheet, cognizance order dated 16.01.2012 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 15 of 2012, captioned as State v. Hansa Devi and others, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 504 and 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranikhet, District Almora.

(2.) A compounding application being CRMA No. 620 of 2017 has been filed by the parties to show that the parties have buried their differences and have settled their disputes amicably. Applicants are present in person duly identified by their counsel Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate. Ms. Mamta Bisht (complainant)/respondent no. 2 is present in person, duly identified by her counsel Mr. Chetan Joshi, Advocate. Ms. Mamta Bisht (respondent no. 2) submitted that parties have settled their disputes amicably and now she has no grievance left against the applicants. Both (the husband (Vinod Singh/applicant no. 1) and wife (respondent no.2) Mamta Bisht) have decided to resume their family life. Respondent no. 2 further submitted that she has no objection if the criminal proceedings initiated by her against the applicants are quashed on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

(3.) Whereas offences punishable under Section 504 and 506 of IPC are compoundable offences within the Scheme of Section 320 Cr.P.C., 1973 the other offences are not. The question, which arises for consideration of this Court, is whether the respondent no. 2 (victim) should be permitted to compound the offences alleged against the petitioners or not?