2025:UHC:9502 SL. No. Dat e Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS IA No.01 of 2025 (Compounding Application) In WPCRL No. 1316 of 2025 Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the Petitioners. 2. Mr. G. C. Joshi, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Bharat Chaudhary, learned counsel for Respondent nos.4 and 5. 4. The present writ petition (criminal) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed on behalf of the Petitioners, Aazam S/o Iliyas, Aabad S/o Irshad, Bisarat Ali S/o Iliyas, Muslim S/o Irshad and Irshad S/o Hasmat against the Respondents, Nafees (Complainant) S/o Yaseen and Farukh S/o Raees; the present writ petition comes with the prayer to quash the F.I.R. No.295 of 2024 dated 01.05.2024 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504 & 506 of IPC, lodged at P.S. Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar and further to direct the Respondent nos. 2 & 3 to not to arrest the Petitioners in pursuance of the aforementioned F.I.R. 5. Heard. 6. Admit. 7. The Compounding Application (IA No.01 of 2025) is also annexed with the present writ petition (page no. 19) that is supported with the affidavits of the parties and the said application is being endorsed by the learned counsel for the Petitioners and Respondent nos.4 & 5, Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, Advocate and Mr. Bharat Chaudhary, Advocate respectively. 8. The Petitioners, Aazam & Aabad through V.C. and Bisarat Ali, Muslim and Irshad and Respondents, Nafees (Complainant) and Farukh are present before this Court, who are identified by their respective counsel. 9. After interacting with the parties especially with Respondent 2025:UHC:9502 nos.4 & 5, who make statement that the dispute arose between the parties has already been resolved, the injuries caused to Respondent no.5 are simple in nature, they wish to compound the matter with the present Petitioners and also do not want to proceed with the matter further, therefore, the proceedings and other consequential order arising out of the F.I.R. in question may be quashed. 10. The said compounding application is strongly opposed by the learned State counsel on the ground that some of the offences are non- compoundable. 11. In view of the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of “Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab” reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 as well as in Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 115 of 2012 (Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh) decided on 06.12.2012, criminal proceedings can be quashed by this Court, if this Court is satisfied with the facts and circumstances of the case. 12. Keeping in view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met, if the entire proceedings against qua the Petitioners are hereby quashed. 13. In view of the above, the compounding application is allowed. The F.I.R. No.295 of 2024 dated 01.05.2024 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504 & 506 of IPC, lodged at P.S. Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar, is hereby quashed petitioners. 14. The present writ petition (criminal) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is, thus, disposed of in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 29.10.2025 Akash AKASH Digitally signed by AKASH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=dae2472c001d56469ea76fc0caa68f48ef73518c148d140566ab1e26f9cbe61d, postalCode=263001, st=Uttarakhand, serialNumber=27096a1625377537a487dee49224c891823fc6a0334628b21e516047ed4f22f 7, cn=AKASH Date: 2025.10.29 16:08:32 +05'30'