2026:UHC:3234 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS IA 1/2026 (For Compounding Application) In WPCRL No. 608 of 2026 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General with Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Ankush Singhal, learned counsel for the complainant. 4. The instant petition has been moved by the petitioners, who are five in numbers, belongs to the same village, praying for quashing of First Information Report dated 25.01.2026 bearing FIR No. 24 of 2026 P.S. Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar, wherein, the petitioners have been implicated for the offences punishable under sections 115(2), 191(2), 351(2) and 352 of BNS, 2023. 5. The instant petition has been filed along with the compounding application with the affidavits of the petitioners as well as the respondent-complainant and the injured. The petitioners as well as the respondent-complainant are present in court and are identified by their respective counsel. 6. It is contended in the compounding application that all the petitioners and the respondent nos. 4 and 5 belongs to the same village and living in the same vicinity and there was a minor issue with regard to the common passage and now they have settled their dispute amicably and their relations are very cordial. 7. The complainant and the victim are also present in court and they also submits they do not want to pursue with the impugned FIR since their relations with the petitioners are now cordial. 8. Learned Additional Advocate General Mr. G.S. Sandhu submits that all the offences are compoundable except section 191(2) of BNS, 2023, but the same can also be compounded with the 2026:UHC:3234 leave of the court. He also submits that since in this particular case the respondent injured does not want to pursue with the impugned FIR, therefore, there is no useful purpose to go with the investigation. 9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the parties have settled their dispute and the complainant victim does not want to pursue with the impugned FIR and the petitioners and the victim are living in the same locality and there was minor issue with regard to the common passage, which they have already settled, this court is of the view that the compounding application deserves to be allowed. 10. Accordingly, the compounding application as well as the writ petition are allowed. The FIR dated 25.01.2026 bearing FIR No. 24 of 2026 is hereby quashed. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 28.04.2026 PR 2026:UHC:3234