Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand on 19 June, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:5130
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 197 of 2024
19th June, 2025
Farman ..........Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
and another ...........Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Mohd Alauddin, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. S.C. Dumka, A.G.A. with Ms. S.B. Dobhal, B.H. for the State.
Mr. R.P. Singh, Advocate for respondent no.2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
The present C482 application has been filed by
the applicant for quashing the charge sheet dated
25.03.2022 and impugned cognizance/summoning order
dated 26.03.2022 and entire proceedings of Criminal
Case No.78 of 2022 (Case Crime No.30 of 2022), under
Sections 380, 457, 411 and 34 of IPC registered at Police
Station Khanpur, District Haridwar, pending before
learned Judicial Magistrate, Laksar, District Haridwar,
qua, against the applicant.
2. A joint compounding application has been
moved on behalf of the parties, supported by their
respective affidavits, seeking to compound offences under
the aforesaid sections.
3. It is contended in the compounding application
by the parties that the matter has been amicably settled
between them.
4. Both – applicant and respondent no.2 are
present before this Court, who are duly identified by their
respective counsel. On interaction with the parties, they
1
2025:UHC:5130
stated that they have amicably settled their dispute and
there is no reason to continue with the present criminal
proceedings.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has
formally raised objection to the offences made out in the
present case on the grounds that some of the offences are
non-compoundable.
6. 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,
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.”
7. Having considered the submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the
opinion that since the parties have reached to the terms
of the compromise, there would remain 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. 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.
8. Accordingly, Compounding Application (IA
No.2 of 2024) is allowed. The offences between the
parties are permitted to be compounded. As a result, the
impugned charge sheet dated 25.03.2022 and impugned
cognizance/summoning order dated 26.03.2022 and
entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.78 of 2022 (Case
2
2025:UHC:5130
Crime No.30 of 2022), under Sections 380, 457, 411 and
34 of IPC registered at Police Station Khanpur, District
Haridwar, pending before learned Judicial Magistrate,
Laksar, District Haridwar, stand quashed, qua, the
applicant-Farman.
9. C482 application stands disposed-off, in the
aforesaid terms.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
19.06.2025
SK
3