Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 822 (UTT)

SURENDRA SINGH NEGI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2016-11-10

U.C.DHYANI

body2016
JUDGMENT Hon’ble U. C. Dhyani, J. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner seeks to quash the impugned FIR dated 26.06.2015 being Case Crime No.125 of 2015, under Section 306 IPC, P.S. Vikasnagar, District Dehradun. 2. An FIR was lodged against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC alleging therein that the petitioner abetted the commission of suicide by victim. Victim’s mother- Shakambaribi is present before the Court, duly identified by her counsel Mr. Kanti Ram Sharma, Advocate. Petitioner-Surendra Singh Negi is present in person before the Court, duly identified by his counsel Mr. Rajat Mittal, Advocate. Victim’s mother submitted that she is not interested in prosecuting the petitioner. She further submits that she has no grudge against her son-in-law. 3. A compounding application has been filed on behalf of the parties, but this Court is unable to permit such compounding in view of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 160. 4. After arguing the writ petition at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that some time may be granted to the petitioner to surrender before the Magistrate concerned and no coercive measure should be taken against him till then. It is further prayed that the court below be directed to decide the bail application of the petitioner as early as possible, subject to his surrender. 5. Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned Deputy Advocate General have no objection to it. Complaint/mother of victim has no objection if the bail is granted to the applicant by the learned Sessions Judge. 6. Considering the allegations levelled against the petitioner and grounds taken up in the criminal writ petition, this Court feels that the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is worth accepting. Four weeks’ time is granted to the petitioner to surrender before the Magistrate concerned. No coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioner for a period of four weeks from today. It is further provided that if the learned Magistrate is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, the same may be dismissed on the same day. Thereafter, if the bail application is moved by the petitioner before the Sessions Judge concerned, it is directed that his bail application shall be decided as expeditiously as possible and without unreasonable delay. It is further provided that if the learned Magistrate is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, the same may be dismissed on the same day. Thereafter, if the bail application is moved by the petitioner before the Sessions Judge concerned, it is directed that his bail application shall be decided as expeditiously as possible and without unreasonable delay. 7. With the observations as above, the criminal writ petition is disposed of. 8. Let a copy of this order be provided to the learned counsel for the parties today itself on payment of usual charges.