[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
C528/362/2026 on 11 March, 2026
2026:UHC:1596
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
C528/362/2026
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned
counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the
State.
3. Mr. Mohit Pande, learned counsel for
respondent no.2.
4. The present C-528 application has
been filed seeking quashing of the
charge-sheet as well as the
summoning/cognizance order dated
06.11.2023 passed in Criminal Case No.
4472 of 2023, under Sections 447, 504,
34 I.P.C., pending in the court of learned
Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District
Nainital, along with the entire
proceedings of the aforesaid case.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants
would submit that respondent
no.2/complainant lodged an F.I.R. dated
13.05.2023 alleging therein that the
applicants along with other co-accused
persons, with an intention to take
possession of the premises which they
had purchased through e-auction,
forcibly entered the house and threw out
the belongings of the guard deployed by
the respondent no.2/complainant. After
completion of investigation, the
Investigating Officer submitted a charge-
sheet, upon which the learned court
2026:UHC:1596
below took cognizance and summoned
the applicants to face trial.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants
would further submit that during the
pendency of the proceedings the parties
have amicably settled their dispute
outside the Court. In this regard, a joint
compounding application along with
affidavits of the applicants and
respondent no.2/complainant has been
filed stating that the dispute has been
resolved between them and respondent
no.2 does not wish to pursue the
criminal proceedings any further.
Therefore, it has been prayed that the
entire criminal proceedings be quashed
in view of the compromise arrived at
between the parties.
7. Learned counsel appearing for
respondent no.2/complainant does not
dispute the aforesaid fact and fairly
submits that the dispute between the
parties has been settled amicably.
8. Applicant no.1 Nirmal Singh,
applicant no.2 Amritpal Singh, and
respondent no.2/complainant are
present in person before the Court and
have been duly identified by their
respective counsel. Upon interaction with
the Court, respondent no.2/complainant
states that the matter has been resolved
amicably between the parties and he
does not wish to prosecute the
applicants any further. He has no
objection if the criminal proceedings are
quashed in terms of the compromise.
2026:UHC:1596
9. Learned State Counsel opposes the
application; however, he does not
dispute the factum of compromise
entered into between the parties.
10. Heard learned counsel for the
parties and perused the record.
11. From the perusal of the record, it
transpires that the dispute between the
parties arises out of a private dispute
relating to possession of property, and
the offences alleged against the
applicants are under Sections 447 and
504 I.P.C., which are essentially of a
personal nature and do not involve any
element of grave public interest.
12. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian
Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC
303 has held that the High Court, in
exercise of its inherent powers under
Section 482 Cr.P.C., can quash criminal
proceedings in appropriate cases where
the parties have settled their dispute and
the offences are predominantly of a
private nature. Similar view has been
reiterated in Narinder Singh vs. State of
Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466 and State of
Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan
(2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein it has been
held that criminal proceedings arising
out of personal disputes may be quashed
if the parties have amicably settled the
matter and continuation of proceedings
would amount to abuse of the process of
Court.
13. Considering the nature of
allegations, the compromise arrived at
2026:UHC:1596
between the parties, and the statement
of respondent no.2 that he does not wish
to pursue the matter any further, this
Court is of the view that no useful
purpose would be served in continuing
the criminal proceedings.
14. Accordingly, the compounding
application is allowed. Consequently, the
present C-528 application is also
allowed. The charge-sheet and
summoning/cognizance order dated
06.11.2023 passed in Criminal Case No.
4472 of 2023 under Sections 447, 504,
34 I.P.C., pending in the court of learned
Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District
Nainital, as well as the entire
proceedings of the aforesaid criminal
case, are hereby quashed qua the
applicants.
15. Pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of accordingly.
(Alok Mahra J.)
11.03.2026
MA
Mamta RANI
MTA
2.5.4.20=6a812005bebfcf46
f244f3e584af1449e430ef90
0bf09a6d67ebbd64267132
9b, postalCode=263001,
st=Uttarakhand,
serialNumber=5de1751a4f1
RANI
d9cabfd54852c9e68911ca8
b66dd26690a191648ab5d8
dd004ef0, cn=MAMTA RANI
Date: 2026.03.13 16:50:18
+05'30'
