Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17134 (UTT)

SUBHAM CHANDRA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/1704/2025 · 2025-12-18

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 JUDGES’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:11332 WPCRL No. 1704 of 2025 Hon ’ble Ash ish Nait h an i, J . Mr. Bhuwnesh Joshi, learned counsel for the Petitioner. 2. Mr. Vipul Painuly, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Mr. Ashutosh Joshi, learned counsel for Respondent No. 3 4. The present Criminal Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been instituted by the Petitioner against the Respondents, particularly Respondent No. 3, with the following prayer: “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 01.07.2025, registered as Case Crime No. 79/2025, under Sections 333, 351(2), 352 of B.N.S., 2023 P.S. Kotwali Pithoragarh, District Pithoragarh” 5. Today, the matter is listed for disposal of the Compounding Application (I.A. No. 01 of 2025, Paper No. 16, seeking permission to compound the offences on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their dispute. 6. The application has been duly signed by both the parties and endorsed by their respective learned counsels, namely, Mr. Bhuwnesh Joshi, learned counsel for the Petitioner, and Mr. Ashutosh Joshi, learned counsel for Respondent No. 3. Affidavits in support of the application have also been filed. The said application is further fortified by the affidavits of the parties. 7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that, as per the FIR, the main allegation is that the Petitioner had taken the official laptop of Respondent No. 3. 8. Upon interaction with the parties, it has been submitted by Respondent No. 3 that the said act was done inadvertently and that he does not wish to pursue the matter any further. 9. Today, both the parties are present before this Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsels. 10. Learned State Counsel opposes the Compounding Application on the ground that the case involves a serious offence under Section 333 of the B.N.S., 2023, and therefore, such offence is not compoundable. 11. Since the Petitioner is a corporal in the Indian Army and Respondent No. 3 is also a Government employee working as an Information Officer, and after interacting with the parties, this Court finds that the grounds urged in support of the Compounding Application are acceptable and sufficient. 12. In view of the statements made before this Court and the submissions advanced, this Court is satisfied that a genuine and voluntary compromise has been arrived at between the parties, without any duress, coercion, or undue influence. 13. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offences involved, the Compounding Application (I.A. No. 01 of 2025) is allowed, and the compromise between the parties is accepted. 14. Consequently, the F.I.R. dated 01.07.2025, registered as Case Crime No. 79 of 2025, under Sections 333, 351(2), and 352 of the B.N.S., 2023, registered at Police Station Kotwali Pithoragarh, District Pithoragarh, is hereby quashed insofar as it relates to the present Petitioner, in terms of the compromise. 15. The Criminal Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. 16. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( Ash ish Nait h an i, J.) 18.12.2025 Shiksha SHIKSHA BINJOLA Digitally signed by SHIKSHA BINJOLA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3410ef86ae41ec9fbabcd5dba6b3a2c24b5aa08b09c12f21822fbd40bf63 9b1c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=FD80A2D028949381C52796A542D7FF0A9BED00E67B5283D205F 18FE29BDF5DD9, cn=SHIKSHA BINJOLA Date: 2025.12.18 17:32:56 +05'30'