Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand & Another on 8 August, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:6961
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No.555 of 2024
08th August, 2025
Puran Chandra Dauthal & another ..........Applicants
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & another ........Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Ketan Joshi and Mr. Hemant Singh Mahra, Advocates for the
applicants.
Mr. S.C. Dumka, A.G.A. along with Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal, B.H.
for the State.
Mr. Rajesh Joshi, Advocate for respondent no.2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Present C482 application has been filed by the
applicants along with a joint compounding application
(IA/2/2025) for quashing the charge-sheet dated
31.05.2022, summoning/cognizance order dated
01.07.2022 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal
Case No.2556 of 2022, State vs. Puran Chandra Dauthal
& another, under Sections 420 & 120-B IPC pending in
the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Haldwani, District Nainital on the basis of compromise
entered into between the parties.
2. The ground for seeking compounding of
offences is that parties have reached to the terms of
compromise wherefor a settlement has also arrived at
between them at the terms of ₹11,00,000/- to be given by
the applicant to respondent no.2. It is thus, prayed that
the present proceedings between the parties may be
quashed in terms of the compromise arrived at between
the parties.
1
2025:UHC:6961
3. Learned State Counsel raised a preliminary
objection to the effect that the offences sought to be
compounded are non-compoundable.
4. Applicant no.1-Puran Chandra Dauthal,
applicant no.2-Smt. Manju Dauthal and respondent
no.2/informant-Deepak Kavidayal are present in the
Court being duly identified by their respective counsel.
5. In the compounding application, it has been
stated that applicants and respondent no.2 have
amicably resolved their dispute and they do not want to
pursue with the criminal proceedings.
6. This Court interacted with the parties
specifically respondent no.2. Respondent no.2 stated
before the Court that he has no grievance against the
applicants; wants to live peacefully and he does not
want to pursue the aforesaid criminal case. He further
submits that he has received the entire amount of
₹11,00,000/- as agreed through two Bankers Cheques
No.002186 and 002187 each worth Rs.5.50 lakh. The
photocopies of these cheques are placed on record.
7. Since the parties have settled the dispute
amicably and do not want to pursue the aforesaid
criminal case, therefore, there is no useful purpose for
keeping this criminal case pending and it will be a
futile exercise to ask the applicant to appear before the
trial court as accused to face the trial.
8. So far as compounding of non-compoundable
offence is concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with the
consequence of a compromise in this regard in the case of
B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another,
2
2025:UHC:6961
reported in (2003)4 SCC 675 and has held as below: –
“If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of
FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a
bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is, however, a
different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances
of each case whether to exercise or not such a power.”
9. Thus, the High Court, in exercise of its
inherent power can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or
complaint, and Section 320 of Cr.P.C. does not limit or
affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973.
10. Parties have reached to the terms of the
compromise and this Court is of the firm opinion that
there would be a remote or bleak possibility of
conviction in this case. It can also safely be inferred
that it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of
justice to permit continuation of the criminal
proceedings after settlement. Since the answer to the
aforesaid points is in affirmative, this Court finds it a
fit case to permit the parties to compound the matter.
11. Accordingly, compounding application
(IA/2/2025) is hereby allowed. The compromise
arrived at between the parties is accepted. With the
result, the charge-sheet dated 31.05.2022,
summoning/cognizance order dated 01.07.2022 as well
as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.2556 of
2022, State vs. Puran Chandra Dauthal & another, under
Sections 420 & 120-B IPC pending in the court of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District
Nainital is hereby quashed qua the applicants. Charge-
sheet and all subsequent proceedings pursuant to FIR
be also quashed qua the applicants only.
12. Since the entire proceedings of Criminal Case
3
2025:UHC:6961
No.2556 of 2022, State vs. Puran Chandra Dauthal &
another, under Sections 420 & 120-B IPC have been
quashed, therefore bank account of the applicant no.1
and applicant no.2 which have been freezed to the extent
of ₹3,50,000/- each by the learned Trial Court
automatically will be defreezed being Account Nos.
4441745931 and 4441796237.
13. Present criminal misc. application thus
stands allowed.
14. Pending application, if any, stands disposed
of accordingly.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
08.08.2025
AK
4