[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
28 November vs State Of Uttarakhand & Another on 28 November, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:10589
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc Application No. 2076 of 2025
28 November, 2025
Shardul Negi & another --Applicants
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand & another --Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Harshit Sanwal, learned counsel for the applicants.
Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned AGA for the State.
Ms. Ishita Dhaila, learned counsel for respondent no.2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Present C528 application has been filed by the
applicant along with the joint compounding application
(IA/1/2025) for quashing the FIR No.76 of 2021 dated
26.11.2021 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal
Case No.1900 of 2022, State of Uttarakhand vs. Shardul
Negi & others, under Sections 353, 504 & 509 of IPC,
whereby the applicants have been convicted for offence
under Sections 353 & 504 IPC by the court of Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Nainital and which is the subject
matter of a Criminal Appeal No.47 of 2025, Shardul Negi &
another vs. State & another, pending before the learned
Sessions Judge, Nainital on the basis of compromise
entered into between the parties.
2. The ground for seeking compounding of offences
is that parties have reached to the terms of compromise
wherefor a settlement has also reached between them. It is
thus, prayed that the present proceedings of Criminal
Appeal No.47 of 2025, Shardul Negi and another vs. State
and another, pending in the court of learned Sessions
Judge, Nainital between the parties may be quashed in
terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties.
The learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that appeal
is the continuation of the trial and therefore, offence could
2025:UHC:10589
be compounded at the stage of criminal appeal.
3. Learned State Counsel raised a preliminary
objection to the effect that the offences sought to be
compounded are non-compoundable.
4. Applicant no.1-Shardul Negi, applicant no.2-
Dhana Negi @ Janki Negi are present in the Court and
respondent no.2-Tuhina Sen-informant (appeared through
V.C.) are present in the Court being duly identified by their
respective counsel.
5. In the compounding application, it has been
stated that applicants and respondent no.2 have amicably
resolved their dispute and they do not want to pursue with
the criminal proceedings.
6. Upon interaction, respondent no. 2 stated before
this Court that she does not want to prosecute the above
criminal case against the applicants in view of the
resolution of their grievance as the applicants have
tendered the apology to the respondent no.2 in respect of
the alleged FIR. Thus, respondent no.2 submits that the
entire proceedings be quashed in terms of the compromise
entered into between the applicants and respondent no.2.
7. Since the parties have settled the dispute
amicably and do not want to pursue the aforesaid criminal
appeal, therefore, there is no useful purpose for keeping
this criminal appeal pending, in the interest of justice, once
the parties have settle their dispute and want to
compromise and compound the case.
8. So far as compounding of non-compoundable
offence is concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with the
consequence of a compromise in this regard in the case of
B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another,
2025:UHC:10589
reported in (2003)4 SCC 675 and has held as below: -
"If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes
necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of power
of quashing. It is, however, a different matter depending upon the facts
and circumstances of each case whether to exercise or not such a power."
9. Thus, the High Court, in exercise of its inherent
power can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint,
and Section 320 of Cr.P.C. does not limit or affect the
powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, even in the appellate stage as appeal is
continuation of trial.
10. Accordingly, compounding application
(IA/1/2025) is hereby allowed. The compromise arrived at
between the parties is accepted. With the result, the
Criminal Appeal No.47 of 2025, Shardul Negi & another vs.
State & another, pending before Sessions Judge, Nainital
stands allowed. The judgment and order dated 30.07.2025
passed by the learned CJM, Nainital in Criminal Case
No.1900 of 2022, State of Uttarakhand vs. Shardul Negi &
others, whereby the applicants have been convicted and
sentenced for offence under Sections 353 & 504 IPC is
hereby set-aside. The applicants are acquitted of the
charges for which they have been convicted by learned trial
court. FIR No.76 of 2021, under Sections 353, 504 & 509
IPC dated 26.11.2021, registered with Police Station
Mallital, Nainital stands quashed.
11. Applicants are on bail. They need not to
surrender, if not wanted in connection with any other
matter.
12. Present criminal misc. application thus stands
disposed of. Other pending applications, stand disposed of
accordingly.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
28.11.2025
AK
