Uttarakhand High Court
C528/363/2026 on 11 March, 2026
2026:UHC:1607
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
C528/363/2026
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned counsel
for the applicant.
2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the
State.
3. Mr. Faizan, 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
11.08.2025 passed in Criminal Case No.
154 of 2024, under Sections 323, 353,
504 and 506 I.P.C., pending in the court
of learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate/5th ACJ (S.D.), Dehradun
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
21.05.2024 alleging therein that the
informant who is employed as a Cleaner
with Nagar Nigam along with his other
colleagues went to the house of
applicants for posting a challan and met
with an act of abuse, threatening and
criminal force to deter public servant
from discharging of his duty by the
applicants; that, after completion of
investigation, the Investigating Officer
2026:UHC:1607
has submitted chargesheet, on which,
learned trial court took cognizance
against the applicants.
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. Applicants and respondent
no.2/complainant are present through
Video Conferencing 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:1607
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 and
the statements of the parties, it is
evident that the dispute between the
parties has been amicably settled.
Respondent no.2/complainant has
categorically stated before the Court that
he does not wish to pursue the criminal
proceedings any further and has no
objection if the same are quashed. In
view of the compromise arrived at
between the parties and considering that
the dispute is essentially personal in
nature, no useful purpose would be
served by continuing the criminal
proceedings. Therefore, this Court finds
it appropriate to exercise its inherent
jurisdiction in order to secure the ends of
justice.
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
2026:UHC:1607
(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
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
11.08.2025 passed in Criminal Case No.
154 of 2024, under Sections 323, 353,
504 and 506 I.P.C., pending in the court
of learned A.C.J.M./5th A.C.J. (S.D.),
Dehradun 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.)
MAM
Digitally signed by MAMTA
RANI
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH 11.03.2026
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
Mamta 2.5.4.20=6a812005bebfcf46f2
TA
44f3e584af1449e430ef900bf0
9a6d67ebbd642671329b,
postalCode=263001,
st=Uttarakhand,
serialNumber=5de1751a4f1d9
RANI
cabfd54852c9e68911ca8b66d
d26690a191648ab5d8dd004e
f0, cn=MAMTA RANI
Date: 2026.03.13 16:51:15
+05’30’
2026:UHC:1607
[ad_1]
Source link
