Aslam and Others v. State of Uttarakhand

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar's order with Signatures COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS

UKHC010119722026 WPCRL/1313/2026

Aslam And Others --Petitioners Versus State Of Uttarakhand And Others --Respondents

Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶2Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, A.G.A. for the State.

¶3Mr. Susheel Kumar, Advocate for the respondent nos. 3 to 5.

¶4By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought quashing of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 233 of 2026, under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 333, 351(2) and 352 of BNS, registered at Police Station Laksar, District Haridwar.

¶5Now, a compounding application, jointly signed by learned counsel for private respondents and learned counsel for the petitioners, has been filed duly supported by affidavits of the parties.

¶6Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have now entered into a settlement, therefore, the matter needs to be compounded.

¶7Learned counsel for respondent no.3 to 5

submits that dispute has now been amicably settled between the parties, therefore, his client wants to close the matter to ensure that peace is restored.

¶8Today, petitioners and the complainant (respondent no.3) are present before this Court, who are duly identified by their counsels.

¶9Both the parties also made a statement that, in view of the settlement, they want to close the matter.

¶10It has been informed that respondent nos. 4 and 5 are in judicial custody in relation to some other case crime number. Respondent nos. 4 and 5 have filed their Vakalatnama through Jailor and have authorized their mother to file the present compounding application. Be that as it may, the mother is the complainant in this case.

¶11Having regard to the nature of offence and also considering the broad guidelines issued by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab reported in

(2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & others Vs State of Punjab & another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, request of the petitioners deserve to be acceded to.

¶12Since the parties have entered into a compromise, therefore, possibility of the trial resulting into conviction of the accused is remote and bleak and, that being so, continuation of criminal proceedings would visit the accused with great oppression, prejudice and injustice. Rather, it would tantamount to abuse of process of law. Ends of justice would be met if criminal proceedings are put to an end, because this would allow the parties to translate their decision to live in peace in the reality. Resolution of a dispute by

way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.

¶13In view of above discussion, the writ petition is allowed. Consequently, F.I.R./Case Crime No. 233 of 2026, under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 333, 351(2) and 352 of BNS, registered at Police Station Laksar, District Haridwar, is hereby quashed along with all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

¶14Compounding application is, accordingly, disposed of.

(Alok Mahra J.)

13.07.2026 Ujjwal