Saurabh Sharma vs State Of Uttarakhand & Ors on 10 July, 2026

    0
    5
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Uttarakhand High Court

    Saurabh Sharma vs State Of Uttarakhand & Ors on 10 July, 2026

                                                        UKHC010028462020
    
    
    
                                                                    2026:UHC:5646
    
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                                AT NAINITAL
           Compounding Application (IA No.812 of 2026)
                                           In
              Criminal Misc Application No.418 of 2020
    
    Saurabh Sharma                                                 --Applicant
    
                                       Versus
    
    State of Uttarakhand & Ors.                                 --Respondents
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Presence:-
    Ms. Ananya Jain, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate
    for the applicant.
    Mr. Vipul Panuli, learned A.G.A for the State.
    Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the respondent no.2.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.
    

    The present criminal misc. application is filed

    under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the applicant seeking

    SPONSORED

    quashing of the impugned cognizance order dated

    06.08.2019 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

    Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No.5269 of 2019,

    ‘State vs. Saurabh Sharma and others‘ under Sections 498-

    A read with 34 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry

    Prohibition Act and further to quash all the consequential

    proceedings pursuant to the cognizance order dated

    06.08.2019.

    2. During the pendency of the present Criminal

    Misc. Application, Compounding Application (IA No.812 of

    1
    UKHC010028462020

    2026:UHC:5646
    2026) has been filed on behalf of the applicant and

    respondent no.2. An affidavit has been filed in support of

    the compounding application on behalf of respondent no.

    2/complainant, Swati Saurabh Sharma. In the affidavit,

    respondent no.2 has categorically stated that the parties

    have entered into the compromise and settled their

    disputes and hence the deponent has settled the dispute

    with the husband and the family members.

    3. It is further stated in the affidavit of respondent

    no.2/complainant that applicant and the deponent herein

    have preferred a suit for divorce under Section 27 of the

    Uttarakhand Common Civil Code, and presented

    themselves before the learned Principal Judge, Family

    Court, and pressed the first motion on 18.05.2026.

    4. It is also stated in the affidavit of respondent

    no.2/complainant that the applicant has agreed to pay the

    deponent as sum of Rs.17,00,000/- (Rupees Seventeen

    Lacs Only) as permanent alimony and out of the aforesaid

    agreed amount sum of Rs.10,50,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs

    Fifty Thousand Only) has already been received and rest of

    the amount, is liable to be paid at the time of pressing

    second motion.

    5. It is also stated in the affidavit of respondent

    no.2/complainant that since the parties have entered into

    2
    UKHC010028462020

    2026:UHC:5646
    the compromise have resolved their dispute, the deponent

    is not willing to further prosecute the applicant, hence, it is

    in the interest of justice that the charge-sheet the

    cognizance order in the proceedings pending before the

    learned Chief Judicial Magistrate may be quashed in terms

    of the compromise who arrived between the parties.

    6. On interaction with respondent no.

    2/complainant, who is appearing through video

    conferencing and is duly identified by her counsel, Mr.

    Gaurav Singh, Advocate, she stated that she wants to

    resolve the matter and that the parties have filed a petition

    for divorce by mutual consent before the Principal Judge,

    Family Court, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. She

    further stated that she does not wish to prosecute

    applicant and that the compounding application may be

    allowed and the criminal proceedings may be quashed.

    7. The Court also interacted with applicant,

    Saurabh Sharma, who is appearing in person before this

    Court and is duly identified by his counsel, Ms. Ananya

    Jain, learned counsel holding brief for Mr. Sandeep

    Kothari, Advocate. On such interaction, applicant also

    stated that the matter has been resolved and that the

    compounding application may be allowed and the criminal

    proceedings may be quashed.

    3

    UKHC010028462020

    2026:UHC:5646

    8. Learned State counsel raised an objection that

    the offence is against society and Section 498-A of IPC is a

    non-compoundable offence, hence, the compounding

    application cannot be allowed.

    9. However, in view of the judgments of Hon’ble

    Supreme Court in the cases of “B.S. Joshi and others vs.

    State of Haryana and another“, (2003) 4 SCC 675, “Nikhil

    Merchant vs. CBI and another“, (2008) 9 SCC 650 and

    “Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab”, 2012 (10) SCC 303 as

    well as in Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 115 of 2012

    (Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh) decided

    on 06.12.2012, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has permitted

    the compounding of non-compoundable offence. Also, the

    Coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court in the case of

    “Kedar Singh and three others vs. State of Uttarakhand

    and others” reported in 2014 SCC OnLine Utt 2275 has in

    identical circumstances permitted the compounding of

    offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC.

    10. Since the parties have already settled the matter

    amicably and the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the aforesaid

    cases, has permitted compounding in such matters, the

    compounding application deserves to be allowed.

    11. Since respondent no.2/complainant has

    consented to the compounding of the said offences, the

    4
    UKHC010028462020

    2026:UHC:5646
    Compounding Application (IA No. 812 of 2026) is hereby

    allowed.

    12. As a consequence thereof, the impugned

    cognizance order dated 06.08.2019 passed by learned

    Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal

    Case No.5269 of 2019, ‘State vs. Saurabh Sharma and

    others‘ under Sections 498-A read with 34 of I.P.C. and

    Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and other

    consequential proceedings, if any, pursuant to the

    cognizance order dated 06.08.2019, are hereby quashed.

    13. The present Criminal Misc. Application under

    Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is, thus, disposed of in the aforesaid

    terms.

    (Siddhartha Sah, J.)
    10.07.2026
    Akash
    Digitally signed by AKASH

    AKASH
    DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
    2.5.4.20=dae2472c001d56469ea76fc0caa68f48ef7
    3518c148d140566ab1e26f9cbe61d,
    postalCode=263001, st=Uttarakhand,
    serialNumber=27096a1625377537a487dee49224c
    891823fc6a0334628b21e516047ed4f22f7,
    cn=AKASH
    Date: 2026.07.13 10:21:58 +05’30’

    5



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here