Gaurav Bisht and Ors 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

UKHC010133222026 WPCRL/1489/2026

Gaurav Bisht And Ors --Petitioners Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent

Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶2Mr. Manoj Bhatt, Brief Holder for the State.

¶3Mr. Ajay Joshi, Advocate for complainant/respondent nos. 3 and 4.

¶4By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought quashing of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0069 of 2026, under Section 115(2), 351(3), 352 of BNS, registered at Police Station Kotwali Almora, District Almora.

¶5Now, a compounding application, jointly signed by learned counsel for respondent nos. 3 and 4 and learned counsel for the petitioners, has been filed duly supported by affidavits of the parties.

¶6On behalf of the petitioner no. 1, who is a minor, his mother has filed the affidavit while, on behalf of petitioner no. 2, who is also a minor, his father has filed the affidavit.

¶7Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have now entered into a settlement, therefore, the matter needs

to be compounded.

¶8Learned 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.

¶9Today, petitioners and the complainant are present before this Court, who are duly identified by their counsels.

¶10Parties have submitted that petitioners as well as the complainant, both are students and due to some misunderstanding, scuffle took place between them, due to which, respondent no. 4 was injured. Petitioners have assured before this Court that they will not commit such act in future and all such act was done on the spur of the moment.

¶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. 0069 of 2026, under Section 115(2), 351(3), 352 of BNS, registered at Police Station Kotwali Almora, District Almora, is hereby quashed along with all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

¶15Compounding application is, accordingly, disposed of.

(Alok Mahra J.)

28.07.2026 Ujjwal