Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5558 (UTT)

BABLU ALIAS ISRAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/801/2026 · 2026-05-05

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:3419 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 W PCRL/ 8 0 1 / 2 0 2 6 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Ashok Kumar Beniwal, learned counsel for the complainant. 4. The instant petition has been moved by the petitioner Bablu @ Israr, S/o Irfan praying for quashing of FIR dated 11.04.2026 bearing FIR/Case Crime No. 0158 of 2026 registered at P.S. Bhagwanpur District Haridwar wherein he has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 123 and 64(1) of BNS 2023 read with Section 3(a), 41, 5(n)/6 of the POCSO Act. 5. The petition is filed along with the compounding application, i.e., IA No. 1 of 2026 with the contention that the complainant and the petitioner are closed relative and now the parties have settled their disputes, therefore, the complainant does not want to pursue with the impugned FIR. 6. Petitioner Bablu @ Israr and complainant Waris Ali are present in Court along with their family members including the wife of the petitioner. 7. The complainant Waris who is present in Court submits that he has settled the dispute with the petitioner and his family members and does not wish to continue with the impugned FIR. 8. On the other side, Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State submits that the offence, as alleged, in the impugned FIR are non compoundable and requires thorough investigation, since, the allegations are serious in nature with regard to the 2026:UHC:3419 commission of rape of minor. 9. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the seriousness of the allegation, this Court does not find any substance in the petition as well as in the compounding application. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition as well as the compounding application are dismissed and rejected. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 05.05.2026 Parul