Manoj Kumar Gahlaut 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

UKHC010132452026 WPCRL/1480/2026

Manoj Kumar Gahlaut --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent

Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Prince Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶2Mr. Pradeep Lohani, A.G.A. for the State.

¶3Mr. Mohit Kumar Kashyap, Advocate for the complainant/respondent no. 3.

¶4By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought quashing of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 139 of 2026, under Section 299 of BNS, registered at Police Station Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

¶5As per the FIR, petitioner uploaded incriminating material about Bheem Rao Ambedkar in his facebook page.

¶6Learned counsel for petitioner submits that since both the complainant and the petitioner belong to Hindu community, as such, offence under Section 299 of BNS could not have been invoked against the petitioner. It is also submitted that accidently the post was uploaded in his facebook page by his minor son, who was playing videogame and as soon as it came in his knowledge, he deleted the said post and also posted apology for the

same.

¶7Now, a compounding application, jointly signed by learned counsel for respondent no. 3 and learned counsel for the petitioner, has been filed duly supported by affidavits of the parties.

¶8Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the parties have now entered into a settlement, therefore, the matter needs to be compounded.

¶9Learned counsel for respondent no.3 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.

¶10Today, petitioner and the complainant are present before this Court, who are duly identified by their counsels.

¶11Both the parties also made a statement that, in view of the settlement, they want to close the matter.

¶12Having 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 petitioner deserves to be acceded to.

¶13Since 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 immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.

¶14In view of above discussion, the writ petition is allowed. Consequently, F.I.R./Case Crime No. 139 of 2026, under Section 299 of BNS, registered at Police Station Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar, is hereby quashed along with all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

¶15Compounding application is, accordingly, disposed of.

(Alok Mahra J.)

04.08.2026 Ujjwal