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
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Uttarakhand/
  4. 2024/
  5. January

Sunil Chand vs. State of Uttarakhand

Decided on 31 January 2024• Citation: C482/145/2024• High Court of Uttarakhand
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                        Office Notes,                                             
                       reports, orders or                                         
          SL.           proceedings or                                            
                Date                           COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS         
          No            directions and                                            
                       Registrar’s order                                          
                        with Signatures                                           
             31.01.2024           C482 No. 145 of 2024                            
                                  Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.                    
                                          1. Mr. Manoj Bhatt, learned counsel for 
                                  the applicant; Mr. M.A. Khan, learned AGA for the
                                  State and  Mr.  Sachin, learned counsel for     
                                  respondent No. 2.                               
                                          2. The instant Application has been     
                                  preferred under Section 482 CrPC, along with the
                                  Compounding  Application (IA/1/2024), which is  
                                  supported with the affidavits of the applicant and
                                  respondent No. 2.                               
                                          3. The  respondent  No.  2  is  the     
                                  complainant i.e. the wife of the applicant and  
                                  they married in the year 2013 and thereafter, due
                                  to this wedlock, one daughter was born in 2015. 
                                          4. Since last one year some differences 
                                  were  arose consequently the respondent No. 2   
                                  the complainant left the house of her husband   
                                  and residing with her parents along with minor  
                                  daughter.                                       
                                          5. It is submitted in the Compounding   
                                  Application that due   to some   differences    
                                  between the applicant and respondent No. 2, the 
                                  FIR has been lodged by respondent No. 2, in     
                                  which after the investigation, charge-sheet was 

                                  filed and cognizance was taken.                 
                                          6. In the compounding application it is 
                                  contended   that  both  the  applicant and      
                                  respondent No. 2  came up  with an amicable     
                                  settlement that they will live together and since
                                  for the last three months, they are living with 
                                  their minor daughter.                           
                                          7. Both the applicant and respondent No.
                                  2 are present physically along with their minor 
                                  daughter. The applicant and the respondent No. 2
                                  are identified by their respective counsel through
                                  their Aadhaar Cards.                            
                                          8. This Court interacted with them and  
                                  both of them  fairly submit that they are now   
                                  living together for the last three months with  
                                  their daughter.                                 
                                          9. On interaction the respondent No. 2  
                                  who  is the wife of the applicant submits that she
                                  does  not  want  to proceed  with the  case     
                                  otherwise it will spoil the family life of the  
                                  applicant and respondent No. 2.                 
                                          10. Mr. M.A. Khan, learned AGA for the  
                                  State submits that looking to the nature of     
                                  allegations levelled in the FIR, the offence    
                                  punishable under Section 498A and 509(B) IPC    
                                  are not compoundable but he fairly submits that 

                                  looking to the nature of allegations and further
                                  taking into consideration that both the applicant
                                  and respondent No. 2 are living together along  
                                  with their daughter, these offences can also be 
                                  compounded.                                     
                                          11. 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 AGA for the 
                                  State, this Court is of the  view  that the     
                                  compounding application deserves to be allowed. 
                                          12. In view of this, the Compounding    
                                  Application is allowed.                         
                                          13. The proceedings of Criminal Case No.
                                  934 of 2023, State Vs. Sunil Chand, wherein the 
                                  present applicant is facing trial for the offences
                                  under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 509(B) IPC,
                                  pending  in the Court of  Civil Judge/Judicial  
                                  Magistrate, Tanakpur, District Champawat, are   
                                  hereby quashed.                                 
                                          14. Accordingly, the C482 Application   
                                  stands disposed of.                             
                                                         (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)   
                                                             Vacation Judge       
                                                              31.01.2024          
                                  Mahinder/