Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Uttarakhand/
  4. 2024/
  5. February

Munvar Hussain vs. State of Uttarakhand

Decided on 29 February 2024• Citation: C482/211/2024• High Court of Uttarakhand
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                        Office Notes,                                             
                       reports, orders                                            
          SL.          or proceedings or                                          
                Date                          COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS          
          No            directions and                                            
                       Registrar’s order                                          
                       with Signatures                                            
             29.02.2024           C482  No. 211 of 2024                           
                                  With                                            
                                  Compounding Application No. IA/1/2024           
                                  Hon’ble Rakesh  Thapliyal, J.                   
                                          1. Mr. Vikas Singh Yadav, learned counsel
                                  for the applicant, Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned 
                                  Brief Holder for the State and Mr. Bhupendra    
                                  Prasad Koranga, learned counsel holding brief of
                                  Mr. Ravi Bisht, learned counsel for respondent No.
                                  2.                                              
                                          2. The instant C482 Application has been
                                  moved  for quashing of the proceedings of Criminal
                                  Case No. 214 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No.
                                  301 of 2022, State Vs. Munvar Hussain and others,
                                  whereby  the  present applicants have been      
                                  implicated for the offences punishable under    
                                  Sections 147, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC, registered at
                                  P.S. Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, which is
                                  pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial
                                  Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar.
                                          3. The  C482  Application has been      
                                  preferred along with the Compounding Application,
                                  which  is supported with the affidavits of the  
                                  applicants and respondent No. 2. The applicants 
                                  and respondent No. 2 are present in Court and they
                                  are duly identified by their respective counsel 
                                  through their Aadhaar Cards. This Court has also

                                  interacted each of them.                        
                                          4. It is contended in the Compounding   
                                  Application that the complainant and all the    
                                  applicants are in fact the family members and the
                                  brother of the complainant married with the     
                                  daughter of applicant No. 1-Munvar Hussain. But,
                                  due  to  some  differences, both are residing   
                                  separately. The brother  of the  respondent     
                                  complainant is serving in Saudi Arabia.         
                                          5. In the compounding application, it is
                                  agreed  that the brother of  the respondent     
                                  complainant settled the dispute with his wife i.e.
                                  the daughter of applicant No. 1 and towards     
                                  permanent alimony, it is agreed that he will pay Rs.
                                  6.00 lakh to his wife the daughter of applicant No.
                                  1. It is informed to this Court that out of total
                                  amount of Rs. 6.00 lakh, Rs. 2.00 lakh has already
                                  been paid and the remaining amount will be paid 
                                  by tomorrow.                                    
                                          6. It is also contended in the compounding
                                  application that due to some  differences in    
                                  between the daughter of applicant No. 1 with the
                                  brother of respondent No.2 complainant, this FIR
                                  has been  lodged. Now, they have settled their  
                                  disputes. The complainant-Arshad is present in  
                                  Court and this Court has also interacted with him
                                  and he submitted that only because of the dispute

                                  in between the daughter of applicant No. 1 with 
                                  the brother of respondent No. 2, this FIR has been
                                  lodged and  since both of them  settled their   
                                  disputes, he doesn’t want to pursue the aforesaid
                                  proceedings.                                    
                                          7. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Brief   
                                  Holder for the State fairly submits that pursuant to
                                  the FIR, the charge-sheet has been filed after  
                                  collecting the credible evidence, however, he fairly
                                  submits that all the applicants and respondent No.
                                  2 the complainant are family members, and in fact,
                                  the main cause of institution of this FIR is nothing
                                  but a dispute in between the daughter of the    
                                  applicant No. 1 with the brother of complainant 
                                  respondent No. 2, and since they have resolved  
                                  their dispute and the daughter of applicant No. 1
                                  and the brother of respondent No. 2 have now    
                                  decided to be separated and it is agreed that   
                                  towards permanent alimony Rs. 6.00 lakh is to be
                                  paid, out of which Rs. 2.00 lakh has already been
                                  paid and remaining amount will be paid tomorrow.
                                          8. Learned Brief Holder for the State   
                                  further pointed out that except the offences    
                                  punishable under Sections 147 and 506 of IPC, rest
                                  of the offences are compoundable, but since all are
                                  family members, and they have now settled their 
                                  disputes, therefore, these offences can also be 

                                  compounded.                                     
                                          10. After hearing the learned counsel for
                                  the parties and looking to the grounds as taken in
                                  the compounding application and further on the  
                                  submissions advanced by the learned Brief Holder
                                  for the State, this Court is of the view that the
                                  compounding application deserves to be allowed. 
                                          11. In view of this, the Compounding    
                                  Application is allowed.                         
                                          12. The proceedings of Criminal Case No.
                                  214 of 2024, State Vs. Munvar Hussain and others,
                                  wherein the present applicants are facing trial for
                                  the offences punishable under Sections 147, 323,
                                  504 and 506 of IPC, registered at P.S. Kashipur,
                                  District Udham Singh Nagar, pending in the Court
                                  of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur,
                                  District Udham Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed. 
                                          14. Accordingly, the C482 Application   
                                  stands disposed of.                             
                                                        (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)    
                                                             29.02.2024           
                                  Mahinder/