2026:UHC:3231 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS Compounding application No. 3 of 2026 In WPCRL No. 1263 of 2025 with Compounding application No. 4 of 2026 WPCRL No. 1247 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. A.S. Rawat, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Balvinder Singh for the petitioners in WPCRL No. 1263 of 2025/ respondents in WPCRL No. 1247 of 2025. 2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Lalit Samant, learned counsel for the respondents in WPCRL No. 1263 of 2025/ petitioners in WPCRL No. 1247 of 2025. 4. These two writ petitions have been moved by the petitioners for quashing of the FIR as well as cross FIR. In WPCRL No. 1263 of 2025 the First Information Report dated 10.10.2025 bearing FIR No. 0111 of 2025 Police Station - Kaladhungi, District - Nainital has been challenged and in WPCRL No. 1247 of 2025 the First Information Report dated 10.10.2025 bearing FIR No. 0110 of 2025 Police Station - Kaladhungi, District Nainital. 5. Counter affidavit has been filed by the I.O. in both the writ petitions and thereafter, now the compounding applications have been moved in both the petitions with this contention that the petitioners of both the writ petitions and the respondents/complainants belong to the same village and they are, in fact, were friends. They assembled on the 2026:UHC:3231 date of the incident at Ramleela Maidan and there were some hot talks between them, however, no one was injured in that incident. It is further contended that all of them have settled their disputes amicably and now, their relations are very cordial and therefore, the complainants of both the FIRs do not want to pursue the impugned FIRs. The complainant of both the FIR are also made an accused in the FIR as well as in the cross FIR. The petitioners of both the petitions and the respondent/complainant are also present in Court and are identified by their respective counsel. 6. It is also contended by the learned counsel for both the parties that both the cases are of no injury however the investigation is still going on, therefore, taking into consideration that all of them settled their dispute amicably, therefore, both the FIRs be quashed. 7. On the other hand, Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned State counsel after perusing the record admits that both the cases are of no injury case, however, investigation is still going on. He submits that since both the complainants does not want to pursue with the impugned FIRs, therefore, there is no useful purpose to go with the investigation. 8. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the averments as made in the compounding applications as well as the FIRs, this Court is of the view that since both the parties have settled their disputes and now, their relations are cordial and they belong to same village and they do not want 2026:UHC:3231 to pursue with both the FIRs and the investigation has not yet been concluded, no useful purpose will be served to go with the investigation, accordingly, both the writ petitions as well as the compounding applications are allowed. Impugned First Information Report dated 10.10.2025 bearing FIR No. 0111 of 2025 Police Station Kaladhungi, District Nainital as well as impugned First Information Report dated 10.10.2025 bearing FIR No. 0110 of 2025 Police Station Kaladhungi, District Nainital are hereby quashed. 9. No order as to costs. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 28.04.2026 SKS/Nahid 2026:UHC:3231