BHUPENDRA SINGH AND ORS vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

UKHC010165052026

2026:UHC:9644

Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
SL.
Date
No.

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS


C528/2026/2026


Bhupendra Singh And Ors
--Applicant

Versus

State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
With
C528/2032/2026

Gurnam Singh And Ors
--Applicant

Versus

State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent


Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Arjun Arora, learned counsel for
the applicants in C-528 No.2032 of 2026.
2. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned
A.G.A. for the State.
3. Mr. Abhishek Verma, learned
counsel for respondents/complainant.
4. Both these C-528 applications arise
out of cross-F.I.R.s relating to the same
incident and involve the same parties.
Since the disputes arise out of the same
occurrence and have been amicably
settled between the parties, both the
applications are being heard and decided
together.
5. The present C-528 applications
have been filed seeking quashing of the

UKHC010165052026

2026:UHC:9644

charge-sheets, cognizance/summoning
orders dated 03.04.2023 passed in
Criminal Case Nos. 885 of 2023 and 889
of 2023, respectively, for the offences
punishable under Sections 147, 148,
323, 504, 506 and 34 of the I.P.C.
pending before the Court of the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur,
District Udham Singh Nagar, as well as
the entire criminal proceedings arising
therefrom.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants
would submit that the present matters
arise out of cross-F.I.R.s lodged in
connection with a dispute between the
parties, who are neighbours residing in
the same village; that, the dispute
allegedly arose over a boundary-related
issue concerning their agricultural fields,
resulting in a sudden altercation between
them. He would further submit that,
upon completion of the investigation,
charge-sheets were submitted against
the applicants, pursuant to which the
learned trial court took cognizance of the
offences and summoned them to face
trial.
7. Learned counsel for the applicants
would further submit that, during the
pendency of the proceedings, the parties
have amicably resolved their dispute. In
this regard, a joint compounding
application, being I.A. No. 1 of 2026,
supported by the respective affidavits of
the parties, has been filed before this
Court. It is submitted that the

UKHC010165052026

2026:UHC:9644

compromise has been entered into
voluntarily, without any coercion, undue
influence or pressure from either side,
and that the parties do not wish to
pursue the criminal proceedings any
further.
8. The applicants and the
respondents/complainants are present
before this Court through video
conferencing and have been duly
identified by their respective learned
counsel. Upon interaction with this
Court, the complainants have affirmed
the factum of the compromise and stated
that the dispute between the parties has
been amicably resolved. They have
further stated that they have no objection
if the criminal proceedings in question
are quashed in terms of the compromise.
9. Learned State counsel would oppose
the prayer for quashing the criminal
proceedings on the ground that some of
the offences alleged against the
applicants are non-compoundable in
nature. However, he does not dispute the
factum of the compromise arrived at
between the parties.
10. Heard learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material
available on record.
11. From the material available on
record and the statements made by the
parties before this Court, it transpires
that the dispute arose out of a
neighbourhood and agricultural-field-
related dispute, which resulted in an

UKHC010165052026

2026:UHC:9644

altercation between the parties. The
parties have now amicably resolved their
differences, and the complainants have
categorically affirmed the compromise
before this Court. Upon consideration of
the circumstances in which the
compromise has been arrived at, this
Court finds that the same appears to be
genuine, voluntary and free from
coercion, undue influence or pressure.
12. It is well settled that the power of
the High Court to quash criminal
proceedings on the basis of a
compromise is distinct from the power of
a criminal court to compound offences
under Section 320 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. In Gian Singh
v. State of Punjab , (2012) 10 SCC 303,
the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the
High Court may, in the exercise of its
inherent jurisdiction, quash criminal
proceedings involving non-compoundable
offences where the dispute is
predominantly private in nature and the
circumstances of the case warrant such
interference in the interest of justice. The
principles governing the exercise of such
jurisdiction have further been explained
in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab ,
(2014) 6 SCC 466, and Parbatbhai Aahir
v. State of Gujarat , (2017) 9 SCC 641.
13. In the present case, the allegations
arise out of a dispute between
neighbours concerning their agricultural
fields, which allegedly resulted in a
sudden altercation. Having regard to the

UKHC010165052026

2026:UHC:9644

nature of the allegations, the
circumstances in which the dispute
arose, the amicable settlement arrived at
between the parties, and the categorical
statements made by the complainants
before this Court that they do not wish to
pursue the matter further, this Court is
of the considered opinion that the
dispute is predominantly private in
nature. In the facts and circumstances of
the present case, the continuation of the
criminal proceedings, despite the
settlement between the parties, would
serve no useful purpose and would not
advance the ends of justice.
14. Accordingly, the joint compounding
application, being I.A. No. 1 of 2026, is
allowed.
15. Consequently, both the C-528
applications are allowed. The charge-
sheets, cognizance/summoning orders
dated 03.04.2023 passed in Criminal
Case Nos. 885 of 2023 and 889 of 2023,
respectively pending before the Court of
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar,
and the entire criminal proceedings
arising therefrom, are hereby quashed.
16. Accordingly, both the applications
stand disposed of.
17. Pending applications, if any, also
stand disposed of.




(Alok Mahra, J.)

26.10.2026
MA
Mamta

MTA
RANI
Digitally signed by MAMTA
RANI
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=6a812005bebfcf46f
244f3e584af1449e430ef900
bf09a6d67ebbd642671329b,
postalCode=263001,
st=Uttarakhand,
serialNumber=5de1751a4f1
d9cabfd54852c9e68911ca8b
66dd26690a191648ab5d8dd
004ef0, cn=MAMTA RANI
Date: 2026.10.27 11:54:42
+05'30'