Uttarakhand High Court
Bunti Alias Hussain Waris And Ors vs State Of Uttarakhand on 27 July, 2026
UKHC010129692026
2026:UHC:6388
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
WPCRL/1441/2026
Bunti Alias Hussain Waris And Ors
........Petitioner
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
......Respondent
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Amit Kapri, learned counsel
for the petitioners.
2. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned
A.G.A. along with Mr. Nikhil Bisht,
learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. Mr. Chandramauli Shah, learned
counsel for respondent no.3.
4. By means of the present criminal
writ petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, the
petitioners seek issuance of a writ,
order or direction in the nature of
certiorari for quashing the Case
Crime/F.I.R. No. 0026 of 2026 dated
21.01.2026, registered under Sections
115(2), 191(2), 351(2), 351(3), 352 of
the B.N.S. at Police Station Haldwani,
District Nainital along with all
consequential proceedings arising
therefrom.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners
would submit that the petitioners are
innocent and have falsely been
implicated in the present case; that, the
impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by
respondent no. 3 alleging that the
petitioners, along with certain other
UKHC010129692026
2026:UHC:6388
persons, unlawfully entered the shop,
abused him in filthy language,
assaulted him, dragged him outside the
shop, and continued to beat him with
kicks and fists. It is further alleged that
the petitioners threatened to kill the
complainant and also extended threats
to kill his brother and the complainant
somehow managed to escape and save
his life.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners
would further submit that the
petitioners and the complainant are
residents of the same village/locality
and the incident in question occurred
on account of a sudden quarrel without
any premeditation. It is submitted that
no specific role has been attributed to
the petitioners in the impugned F.I.R.;
rather, they have been implicated by
way of vague and omnibus allegations.
It is further submitted that the
impugned F.I.R. has been lodged only
as a counterblast to the F.I.R.
registered against the complainant side.
7. He would further submit that that
during the pendency of the present writ
petition, the parties have amicably
settled all their disputes and
differences and have entered into a
compromise of their own free will, with
a view to maintaining peace and cordial
relations in the village. It is, therefore,
contended that in view of the amicable
settlement arrived at between the
parties, no useful purpose would be
served by permitting the criminal
proceedings to continue, particularly
when the complainant and the injured
persons are no longer interested in
UKHC010129692026
2026:UHC:6388
pursuing the prosecution. Accordingly,
it is prayed that the impugned F.I.R.
and all consequential proceedings
arising therefrom be quashed in
exercise of the extraordinary
jurisdiction of this Court under Article
226 of the Constitution of India.
8. It is further submitted that a
Compounding Application, being I.A.
No.1 of 2026, duly supported by
separate affidavits sworn by the
petitioners as well as respondents, has
been filed before this Court. In the said
application, the parties have
categorically stated that they have
entered into the compromise
voluntarily, of their own free will and
without any coercion, pressure,
inducement or undue influence and
have prayed that the impugned F.I.R.
and all consequential proceedings be
quashed in the interest of justice.
9. Learned State Counsel would
oppose the prayer for quashing.
However, he does not dispute the filing
of the compounding application before
this Court.
10. Learned counsel appearing for
respondents would fairly submit that
the dispute between the parties has
been amicably settled and that
respondents have no objection if the
impugned F.I.R. and all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom are
quashed in view of the compromise
arrived at between the parties.
11. Petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are present
in person, whereas petitioner Nos. 3 to
10 have appeared through Video
Conferencing. Respondent No. 3 is also
UKHC010129692026
2026:UHC:6388
present in person. All the parties have
been duly identified by their respective
learned counsel. Upon interaction with
the Court, respondent no. 3 (the
injured/complainant) stated that the
incident had occurred on account of a
sudden altercation and that the parties
have now amicably resolved their
dispute. He further stated that he
harbours no grievance against the
petitioners and has no objection if the
impugned F.I.R. and all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom are
quashed.
12. Heard learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material
available on record.
13. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012)
10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh v. State of
Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466; and State of
Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan,
(2019) 5 SCC 688, has held that the
High Court may, in exercise of its
extraordinary jurisdiction, quash
criminal proceedings involving offences
having overwhelmingly civil,
commercial or personal flavour where
the parties have genuinely settled their
disputes, provided that such offences
are not heinous or of such nature as to
have a serious impact on society or
public interest.
14. In the present case, the allegations
emanate from a personal dispute
arising out of a sudden altercation. The
injured as well as the informant have
appeared before this Court and have
categorically stated that they have
voluntarily settled their disputes with
UKHC010129692026
2026:UHC:6388
the petitioners and do not intend to
pursue the criminal proceedings. This
Court is satisfied that the compromise
is genuine, voluntary and free from any
coercion or undue influence. Having
regard to the nature of the dispute, the
settlement arrived at between the
parties and the law laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court is of
the considered opinion that the
possibility of conviction is remote and
continuation of the criminal
proceedings would amount to an abuse
of the process of law and would not
serve the ends of justice.
15. Accordingly, the Compounding
Application (I.A. No.1 of 2026) is
allowed. Consequently, the Case
Crime/F.I.R. No. 0026 of 2026
registered at Police Station Haldwani,
District Nainital is hereby quashed qua
the present petitioners.
16. The criminal writ petition is,
accordingly, allowed.
17. Pending applications, if any, shall
stand disposed of accordingly.
MA Digitally signed by MAMTA
RANI
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
(Alok Mahra, J.)
27.07.2026
MTA
Mamta 2.5.4.20=6a812005bebfcf46f2
44f3e584af1449e430ef900bf0
9a6d67ebbd642671329b,
postalCode=263001,
st=Uttarakhand,
serialNumber=5de1751a4f1d
RANI
9cabfd54852c9e68911ca8b66
dd26690a191648ab5d8dd004
ef0, cn=MAMTA RANI
Date: 2026.07.28 11:22:50
+05’30’
