Nasreen v. State of Uttarakhand

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

2026:UHC:2041

IA No.1/2026 (Compounding Application) with C528 No.495 of 2026 "Nasreen Vs. State of Uttarakhand & another" Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.

Mr. C.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the Applicant.

¶2Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned AGA with Mr. Nikhil Bisht, learned Brief Holder, for the State of Uttarakhand/1.

¶3Mr. Nitin Tewari, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2.

¶4In the present Application filed under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 the Applicant has put a challenge to the judgment and order dated 19.06.2025, passed by the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramnagar, District Nainital in Criminal Case No.1371 of 2021, "Sunita Vs. Nasreen" under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the judgment and order dated

24.02.2026 passed by the court of learned Additional Session Judge, Ramnagar, District Nainital in Criminal Appeal No.20 of 2025, "Nasreen Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another".

¶5The Applicant and Respondent No.2 are present in person before this Court, who has been duly identified by their learned counsel. The Applicant and the Respondent No.2 have annexed their signatures and duly endorsed by the learned counsel for the parties. The application is also supported with an affidavit of the parties.

¶6Today, the matter is listed for disposal of the aforesaid compounding application.

¶7As per the compounding application, there is a joint submissions on behalf of the Applicant as well as the Respondent No.2 that the incident happened due to misunderstanding, and now they have reconciled the matter and have come into the terms of the compromise and hence the compounding application may be allowed and the matter may be disposed of accordingly.

¶8This Court is of the considered view that the grounds for compounding are sufficient.

¶9Considering the overall facts and circumstance of the case, and particularly, the fact that the parties have settled their dispute amicably, this Court finds ground sufficient for allowing the compounding application.

¶10Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶11In view of the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 as well as in Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 115 of 2012 (Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh) decided on 06.12.2012, criminal proceedings can be quashed by this Court, if this Court is satisfied that matter has been settled between the parties amicably and parties are interested to restore peace and harmony between them.

¶12In view of the above, the compounding application is allowed. The judgment and order dated 19.06.2025, passed by the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramnagar, District Nainital in Criminal Case No.1371 of 2021, "Sunita Vs. Nasreen" under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the judgment and order dated 24.02.2026 passed by the court of learned Additional Session Judge, Ramnagar, District Nainital in Criminal Appeal No.20 of 2025, "Nasreen Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another", are hereby quashed.

¶13The Criminal Miscellaneous Application, filed under 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is disposed of accordingly.

(Ashish Naithani, J.)

23.03.2026 Nitesh/