Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9045 (UTT)

GURUCHARAN SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/751/2025 · 2025-07-16

Pankaj Purohit

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:6190 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Criminal No.751 of 2025 16th July, 2025 Gurucharan Singh ………….Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ………….Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Mani Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.C. Joshi, A.G.A. for the State. Mr. Manoj Bhatt, Advocate for respondent no.3. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby petitioner has put to challenge F.I.R. No.0331 of 2025 dated 06.07.2025, under Sections 351(2) and 352 of B.N.S. 2023 registered at Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, on the ground that parties have entered into an amicable settlement and they want to put this matter to rest. 2. A joint compounding application has been moved on behalf of the parties seeking to compound offences under the aforesaid sections. 3. The ground for seeking compounding of offences is that parties have reached to the terms of compromise wherefor a settlement has also reached between them. It is thus, prayed that the present proceedings between the parties may be quashed in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties. 4. Learned State Counsel submits that the offences are compoundable. 1 2025:UHC:6190 5. Petitioner and respondent no.3 are present before this Court, who are duly identified by their respective counsel. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that 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. 7. Compounding Application (IA No.1 of 2025) is allowed. 8. Accordingly, writ petition stands allowed. The impugned F.I.R. No.0331 of 2025 dated 06.07.2025, under Sections 351(2) and 352 of B.N.S. 2023 registered at Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar is hereby quashed. All subsequent proceedings, pursuant to impugned F.I.R., against the petitioner also stand quashed subject to payment of ₹10,000/-, in the High Court Bar Association Advocates Welfare Fund, Nainital, for the reason that the parties have wasted the valuable public time of the investigating agency and further to act as a deterrent against the petitioner so that he would not indulge in such criminal activities in future. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 16.07.2025 SK 2 2025:UHC:6190 3