Ukhc010125472026 vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 21 July, 2026

    0
    2
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Uttarakhand High Court

    Ukhc010125472026 vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 21 July, 2026

                                                                  UKHC010125472026
    
    
    
                                                                          2026:UHC:6120
                  Office Notes,
                 reports, orders
                 or proceedings
    SL.
          Date    or directions                COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
    No.
                 and Registrar's
                   order with
                   Signatures
                                   WPCRL/1379/2026
    
                                   Mulki Raj And Ors
                                                                      --Petitioners
                                                              Versus
                                   State Of Uttarakhand and Others
                                                                    --Respondents
                                   Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
    

    Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, learned counsel for the
    petitioners.

    Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder
    for the State of Uttarakhand.

    SPONSORED

    Mr. Parth Tamta, learned counsel for
    respondent no. 2.

    2. By means of the present Criminal Writ
    Petition, the petitioners seek quashing of the
    F.I.R. dated 02.06.2025, registered as FIR No.
    184 of 2025, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471
    and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police
    Station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar, along
    with all consequential proceedings arising
    therefrom. The petitioners have also prayed that
    they may not be harassed in connection with the
    aforesaid case.

    3. It is submitted that the entire sale
    consideration paid by respondent no.
    3/complainant has been refunded by the
    petitioners, and consequently, the present
    Compounding Application has been filed.

    4. A Compounding Application, jointly signed
    by learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
    counsel for respondent no. 3 and duly supported
    by the affidavits of the petitioners as well as
    respondent no. 3, has been filed before this Court.

    5. Learned counsel for the parties submit that
    all disputes between the parties have been
    amicably resolved. It is submitted that respondent
    no. 3 has received the entire settled amount and
    has no grievance whatsoever against the
    petitioners.

    6. Today, the petitioners and respondent no. 3
    UKHC010125472026

    2026:UHC:6120
    are present before this Court through video
    conferencing and have been duly identified by
    their respective learned counsel.

    7. Respondent no. 3 has categorically stated
    that he has received the entire settled amount of
    ₹14,00,000/- and has no objection if the
    impugned F.I.R. and all consequential
    proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

    8. This Court has interacted with respondent
    no. 3 and is satisfied that the compromise has
    been entered into voluntarily, without any
    coercion, undue influence or pressure, and out of
    his own free will.

    9. Learned State Counsel submits that since
    the dispute is essentially personal in nature and
    the parties have amicably settled the matter, the
    State has no objection if the present writ petition
    is disposed of in terms of the compromise.

    10. Having heard learned counsel for the
    parties and upon perusal of the material available
    on record, this Court finds that the parties have
    amicably settled their disputes. Respondent no. 3
    has received the entire settled amount and does
    not wish to pursue the criminal proceedings any
    further. In view of the settlement arrived at
    between the parties and the peculiar facts and
    circumstances of the case, the possibility of
    conviction appears to be remote and bleak.
    Continuation of the criminal proceedings would
    serve no useful purpose and would amount to an
    abuse of the process of the Court.

    11. Having regard to the principles laid down
    by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v.
    State of Punjab
    , (2012) 10 SCC 303, and
    considering the peculiar facts and circumstances
    of the present case, this Court is of the considered
    opinion that the ends of justice would be served
    by quashing the impugned F.I.R. and all
    consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

    12. Accordingly, the Criminal Writ Petition is
    allowed. The F.I.R. dated 02.06.2025, registered
    as FIR No. 184 of 2025, under Sections 420, 467,
    468, 471 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,
    at Police Station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar,
    along with all consequential proceedings arising
    therefrom, is hereby quashed.

    UKHC010125472026

    2026:UHC:6120

    13. Consequently, the Compounding
    Application also stands disposed of.

    14. Pending applications, if any, shall also
    stand disposed of.

    (Alok Mahra, J.)
    SHIKSHA
    Digitally signed by SHIKSHA BINJOLA
    DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
    21-07-2026
    SB
    ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
    2.5.4.20=3410ef86ae41ec9fbabcd5dba6b3a2c24b5aa
    08b09c12f21822fbd40bf639b1c, postalCode=263001,

    BINJOLA
    st=UTTARAKHAND,
    serialNumber=FD80A2D028949381C52796A542D7FF
    0A9BED00E67B5283D205F18FE29BDF5DD9,
    cn=SHIKSHA BINJOLA
    Date: 2026.07.21 16:31:00 +05’30’



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here