SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS UKHC010113532026 WPCRL/1230/2026 Dilshad Hussain --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Chandel, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Manoj Bhatt, Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Nikhil Kushwaha, Advocate for respondent no. 3. 4. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought quashing of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0235 of 2026 dated 19.06.2026, under Sections 351(3) and 69 of BNS, registered at Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 5. In this case, an FIR was lodged by respondent no. 3, under Sections 351(3) and 69 of BNS, in which, it was alleged that respondent no. 3 was in relationship with the petitioner for almost four years and the petitioner on the false pretext of marriage, have established physical relations with her and even their marriage date was fixed for 14.06.2026, but it came to the knowledge of the complainant that the petitioner has fixed his marriage with some other lady. Feeling aggrieved, this FIR was lodged. 6. Now, a compounding application, jointly signed by learned counsel for respondent no.3 and learned counsel for the petitioner, has been filed duly supported by affidavits of the parties. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have now entered into a settlement, therefore, the matter needs to be compounded. 8. Learned counsel for respondent no.3 submits that dispute has now been amicably settled between the parties, therefore, his client wants to close the matter to ensure that peace is restored. 9. Today, petitioner and the complainant (respondent no.3) are present before this Court, who are duly identified by their counsels. 10. Both the parties have submitted before this Court that they have agreed to marry each other as per their rites and rituals. Father of the complainant is also present. He has also submitted that marriage would be solemnized between the petitioner and respondent no. 3 within a period of three months. 11. Both the parties also made a statement that, in view of the settlement, they want to close the matter. 12. Having regard to the nature of offence and also considering the broad guidelines issued by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & others Vs State of Punjab & another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, request of the petitioner deserves to be acceded to. 13. Since the parties have entered into a compromise, therefore, possibility of the trial resulting into conviction of the accused is remote and bleak and, that being so, continuation of criminal proceedings would visit the accused with great oppression, prejudice and injustice. Rather, it would tantamount to abuse of process of law. Ends of justice would be met if criminal proceedings are put to an end, because this would allow the parties to translate their decision to live in peace in the reality. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery. 14. In view of above discussion, the writ petition is allowed. Consequently, F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0235 of 2026 dated 19.06.2026, under Sections 351(3) and 69 of BNS, registered at Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, is hereby quashed along with all the proceedings emanating therefrom. 15. Compounding application is, accordingly, disposed of. (Alok Mahra J.) 07.07.2026 Ujjwal