[Cites 12, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
C528/431/2026 on 17 March, 2026
2026:UHC:1770
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
C528/431/2026
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel
for the applicants.
2. Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. for
the State.
3. Mr. Susheel Kumar, learned counsel
for private respondent nos.2 & 3.
4. Present C-528 application has been
filed seeking quashing of the charge-sheet,
cognizance/summoning order dated
06.04.2024 passed by the learned Add.
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Laksar, District
Haridwar in Criminal Case No.170 of 2024
arising out of offences under Sections 147,
148, 149, 323, 504, 506 & 308 I.P.C.
along with the entire criminal proceedings,
on the basis of a compromise arrived at
between the parties.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants
would submit that the F.I.R. was lodged
by the complainant alleging that on
16.07.2023, when respondent no.2 was
alone in her house, the applicant forcibly
entered her room and started assaulting
her. It is further alleged that when her
father reached the spot, the accused fled
away. Shortly thereafter, the applicants,
armed with lathis, dandas, iron rods and a
country-made pistol, again forcibly
entered the house of the complainant and
started assaulting them. It is also alleged
that applicant no.1 aimed the pistol at the
2026:UHC:1770
head of respondent no.3, the father of
respondent no.2. Upon alarm being raised
and local persons gathering at the spot,
the applicants fled from the place of
occurrence. On the basis of the said
allegations, the F.I.R. was registered and,
after completion of investigation, the
Investigating Officer submitted the charge-
sheet, upon which the learned Magistrate
took cognizance.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants
would further submit that the applicants
and respondent nos.2 and 3 are relatives,
being cousin brothers and sisters, and the
alleged incident arose out of a family
scuffle between them.
7. Learned counsel for the applicants
also submits that the applicants and
respondent nos.2 & 3/complainant have
now amicably settled the dispute. A
compounding application along with
affidavits of the applicants and respondent
nos.2 & 3 have been filed before this
Court. The applicants and respondent
nos.2 & 3 are present through Video
Conferencing and have been duly
identified by their respective counsel.
Upon interaction, respondent nos.2 &
3/complainants submits that the dispute
has been settled amicably and they do not
wish to prosecute the applicants further,
and the compromise has been entered
without any coercion, therefore, the
criminal proceedings be quashed.
8. Learned State counsel would oppose
the application and submitted that the
offences under Sections 147, 148, 149 &
308 IPC are non-compoundable offences.
2026:UHC:1770
However, the factum of compromise
between the parties is not disputed.
9. This Court has considered the
submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material available
on record. The offences alleged in the
present case are under Sections 147, 148,
149 & 308 IPC. Though some of these
offences are non-compoundable under
Section 320 Cr.P.C., the dispute between
the parties appears to be personal in
nature and the parties have now amicably
settled the matter.
10. 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 jurisdiction under
Section 482 Cr.P.C., is empowered to quash
criminal proceedings in appropriate cases
where the dispute is essentially of a private
and personal nature and the parties have
settled the matter amicably. The said
principle 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
when the parties have resolved their
differences and the continuation of such
proceedings would amount to an abuse of
the process of the Court.
11. In the present case, the parties have
amicably settled their dispute and the
complainant has clearly stated before this
Court that he does not wish to pursue the
criminal proceedings against the
applicants. In view of the compromise
arrived at between the parties and
2026:UHC:1770
considering the facts and circumstances of
the case, continuation of the criminal
proceedings would serve no useful
purpose.
12. Accordingly, the compounding
application is allowed. Consequently, the
present C-528 application is also allowed.
The charge-sheet and cognizance/
summoning order dated 06.04.2024
passed by the learned Add. Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Laksar, District Haridwar in
Criminal Case No.170 of 2024 arising out
of offences under Sections 147, 148, 149,
323, 504, 506 & 308 I.P.C., are hereby
quashed qua the applicants in terms of
the compromise arrived at between the
parties.
13. Pending applications, if any, shall
stand disposed of accordingly.
MAMTA
RANI
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH
(Alok Mahra, J.)
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=6a812005bebfcf46f244f3e584af1449e430ef900 17.03.2026
Mamta bf09a6d67ebbd642671329b, postalCode=263001,
st=Uttarakhand,
serialNumber=5de1751a4f1d9cabfd54852c9e68911ca8b
66dd26690a191648ab5d8dd004ef0, cn=MAMTA RANI
Date: 2026.03.19 14:55:55 +05'30'
