Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1988 (UTT)

AKHIL BANGARI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/229/2026 · 2026-04-01

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:2324 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS I.A. No. 5 of 2026 In WPCRL/229/2026 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Chandramauli Sah, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addl. Advocate General with Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the State. 3. Mr. V.K. Kaparuwan, learned counsel for the complainant/ respondent no. 3. 4. Petitioner Akhil Bangari, son of Rajendra Singh is praying for quashing of the FIR dated 26.01.2026 bearing FIR No. 35 of 2026, registered at Police Station – Nehru Colony, District Dehradun wherein present petitioner has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 376, 506 IPC. 5. The instant writ petition has been filed along with compounding application duly supported with the affidavit of the petitioner and complainant/ respondent no. 3. 6. Petitioner and complainant / respondent no. 3 are present in the Court and they are duly identified by their respective counsel. 7. In the compounding application, it is contended that parties have settled their dispute out of court and FIR was lodged by respondent no. 3 due to misunderstanding, which has now been resolved and now, the parties have maintained good relations. 8. Respondent no. 3 complainant, who is present in Court, submits that she does not want to pursue the instant FIR and FIR be quashed at this stage, since the investigation is still going on. 9. On the other hand, Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addl. Advocate General submits that though offences are not compoundable but since the investigation is still going on and complainant does not want to pursue the ongoing investigation, therefore, no useful purpose to go with the further investigation. 2026:UHC:2324 10. In such view of the matter, since the parties have settled their dispute amicably and complainant / respondent no. 3 does not want to pursue the FIR, this Court is of view that both the writ petition as well as compounding application deserves to be allowed. 11. Accordingly, writ petition and compounding application are allowed. Impugned FIR dated 26.01.2026 bearing FIR No. 35 of 2026, registered at Police Station – Nehru Colony, District Dehradun for the offence punishable under Section 376, 506 IPC is hereby quashed. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 01.04.2026 SKS 2026:UHC:2324