Petitioners vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 437 UK

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

                            AT NAINITAL

             Criminal Writ Petition No. 347 of 2021


Anurag Tevatiya & others

                                                     .....Petitioners
                            Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others

                                                  ......Respondents

Mr. P.C. Petshali, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mr. Balvinder Singh, learned Brief Holder for the State.
Mr. Naveen Singh Bisht, learned counsel for respondent nos. 3 & 4.


                                      Dated: 24th February, 2020

Hon'ble N.S. Dhanik, J.

The present criminal writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking the following relief:

(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the FIR dated 19.01.2021. registered as FIR No. 32 of 2021, under Section 147, 323, 504 & 506 IPC, registered at P.S. Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar.

2. Now, parties have filed the joint compounding application stating therein that they have entered into compromise and amicably settled their dispute and now the respondent no. 3 does not have any grievance with the petitioner. In support of compounding application (IA No. 1/2021), affidavits have been filed by the petitioners and the respondent nos. 3 & 4.

3. Petitioner no. 1 (Anurag Tevatiya), petitioner no. 2 (Rinku), petitioner no. 3 (Anil Kumar), petitioner no. 4 (Kehsav), respondent no. 3

(Armindar Singh/complainant) and respondent no. 4 (Arjun Deep Singh/victim) are present-in-person before this Court duly identified by their respective counsels.

4. Compounding application bears the signatures/thumb impressions of the petitioners and the respondent nos. 3 & 4. It has been further stated by the parties that now they have amicably settled their dispute. Therefore, learned Counsel for the parties have submitted that the impugned FIR be quashed in terms of the compromise.

5. Learned State Counsel opposed the compounding application on the ground that Section 147 of IPC is non-compoundable.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in B.S. Joshi, (2003) 4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant, (2008) 9 SCC 677; and Manoj Sharma, (2008) 16 SCC.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the legal proposition propounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the compounding application is allowed. Compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted. Impugned FIR No. 32 of 2021, under Section 323, 504 & 506 IPC, registered at P.S. Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar is quashed in terms of the compromise.

(N.S. Dhanik, J.) 24.02.2020 AK