Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14759 (UTT)

JUBEDA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

C482/2191/2023 · 2025-12-09

Ashish Naithani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:10923 (Compounding Appl. No.04 of 2025) In C482 No.2191 of 2023 Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. M.S. Pal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Amreen Bano, learned counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. Vijay Khanduri, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Sparsh Gupta, learned counsel holding brief of Ms. Medha Pandey, learned counsel for Respondent no.3. 4. Present Application has been filed by the Applicant under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. alongwith compounding application and the same is supported with the affidavits of applicant and respondent no.3. 5. By means of this C482 application, applicant has sought quashing of the summoning order dated 02.04.2021 passed by Additional Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Baazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No.1194 of 2017, State of Uttarakhand vs. Dr. Jubeda under Section 304 A of IPC and Section 3, 4, 5 of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act. Further a prayer has been made to quash the Charge Sheet No.465 of 2017 dated 13.12.2017, FIR dated 13.09.2017 as well as all criminal proceedings arising therefrom. 6. Applicant as well as respondent no.3 are present in the Court. They are duly identified by their respective counsels. 7. Learned counsel for the parties have filed their respective affidavits along with the compounding application stating therein that they do not wish to pursue the present criminal case any further and a compromise has been entered between them. 8. Learned State counsel has opposed the compounding application. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 10. In view of the principle of law laid down by Ho’ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303, criminal proceedings can be quashed by this Court, if this Court is satisfied that matter has been settled between the parties amicably and parties are interest to restore peace and harmony between them. 11. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in view of the above, the compounding application is allowed. The FIR No.407 of 2017 dated 13.09.2017, Charge Sheet No.465 of 2017 dated 13.12.2017, impugned summoning order dated 02.04.2021 passed by Additional Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Baazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No.1194 of 2017 are hereby quashed. 12. Accordingly instant C528 application stands disposed of. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 09.12.2025 Arti ARTI SINGH Digitally signed by ARTI SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=487ed955e722ba65aab55409e686c12fb83a19325e8b66890fbee418e7b69c0d, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=26DC90E00D839E3E8714131F235087D2D87E133C57E7F4A7B2E734BE2521F982, cn=ARTI SINGH Date: 2025.12.09 17:24:21 +05'30'