2026:UHC:1685 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C5 2 8 / 3 5 3 / 2 0 2 6 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J. Mr. Deepak Joshi, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Mr. Mr. S.C. Dumka and Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Pankaj Binwal, learned counsel for respondent no.2/complainant. 4. Present C-528 application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 409 of 2023, State vs. Mohd. Zubair and Others, under Sections 379 and 411 I.P.C., pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge, Ramnagar, District Nainital, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that initially an F.I.R. was lodged by respondent no.2 against the applicants alleging therein that the applicants had stolen iron advertising frames. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted a charge-sheet against the applicants, on which the learned trial court took cognizance and passed the summoning order dated 03.04.2023. 6. Learned counsel for the applicants would further submit that the applicants 2026:UHC:1685 and the complainant/respondent no.2 have now amicably resolved their dispute and do not wish to pursue the criminal proceedings any further. In support thereof, a joint compounding application (I.A. No. 1 of 2026), along with affidavits of the applicants and the complainant/respondent no.2, has been filed stating that the complainant does not wish to prosecute the applicants. 7. The applicants and respondent no.2/complainant are present in person and have been duly identified by their respective counsel. Upon interaction, respondent no.2 stated that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the applicants have compensated for the alleged loss; therefore, he does not wish to pursue the matter any further. He has no objection if the aforesaid criminal proceedings are quashed in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 8. Learned State Counsel opposes the application; however, he does not dispute the factum of compromise between the parties or the filing of the joint compounding application. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, it transpires that the dispute between the parties arises out of a private dispute. The allegations made in the F.I.R./charge-sheet are essentially personal in nature and do not involve any element of serious or grave public interest. It is also not in dispute that the 2026:UHC:1685 parties have amicably settled their differences. Respondent no.2/complainant, who is present in person before this Court and duly identified by his counsel, has categorically stated that the dispute has been resolved and he does not wish to pursue the criminal proceedings any further against the applicants. 10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 has held that the High Court, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is empowered to quash criminal proceedings in appropriate cases where the dispute is essentially of a private and personal nature and the parties have settled the matter amicably. The said principle has been reiterated in Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 and State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein it has been held that criminal proceedings arising out of personal disputes may be quashed when the parties have resolved their differences and the continuation of such proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of the Court. 11. Considering the nature of the allegations, the compromise arrived at between the parties, and the categorical statement of respondent no.2 that he does not wish to pursue the matter any further, this Court is of the considered view that no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting the criminal 2026:UHC:1685 proceedings to continue and that the ends of justice would be met by quashing the same. 12. Accordingly, the present C-528 application stands allowed. The charge- sheet, cognizance/summoning order passed in Criminal Case No. 409 of 2023, State vs. Mohd. Zubair and Others, under Sections 379 and 411 I.P.C., pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge, Ramnagar, District Nainital, as well as the entire criminal proceedings of the aforesaid case, are hereby quashed qua the applicants on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 13. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. ( Alok Mahr a, J.) 13.03.2026 Mamta MAM TA RANI Digitally signed by MAMTA RANI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=6a812005bebfcf46f 244f3e584af1449e430ef900 bf09a6d67ebbd642671329b , postalCode=263001, st=Uttarakhand, serialNumber=5de1751a4f1 d9cabfd54852c9e68911ca8b 66dd26690a191648ab5d8dd 004ef0, cn=MAMTA RANI Date: 2026.03.17 10:31:24 +05'30'