Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 565 (UTT)

ASHOKPAL AND OTHERS v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/208/2026 · 2026-01-23

Alok Mahra

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:635 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL/208/2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Ms. Sukhwani Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners through Video Conferencing. 2. Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for private respondents. 4. Present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing F.I.R. No. 0603 of 2025, registered under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station SIDCUL, District Haridwar. 5. The impugned F.I.R. was lodged by respondent no.3 alleging misappropriation in relation to a sale deed purportedly executed in favour of the respondent, against the present petitioners. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel appearing for respondent no.3 jointly submit that the dispute between the parties is essentially private in nature and has been amicably settled. A compounding application, being I.A. No. 1 of 2026, supported by affidavits of the parties, has been filed on record, wherein it has been categorically averred that respondent no.3 does not wish to 2026:UHC:635 pursue the criminal proceedings any further. 7. The petitioners and respondent no.3 are present before the Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel. Upon interaction with respondent no.3, the Court is satisfied that the compromise has been entered into voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence. Respondent no.3 states that the F.I.R. was lodged due to a misunderstanding and that the dispute now stands fully resolved. 8. Considering the nature of the allegations, the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, and the fact that no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the criminal proceedings, this Court is of the view that the present case is a fit one for exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 9. Accordingly, the compounding application (I.A. No. 1 of 2026) is allowed. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and F.I.R. No. 0603 of 2025, registered under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station SIDCUL, District Haridwar, is hereby quashed. 10. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Alok Mahra, J.) Vacation Judge 23.01.2026 Mamta 2026:UHC:635