Disposed¶2

Rehan Qureshi and Ors. v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC3 Jun 2026C528/1097/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of criminal proceedings on compromise/compounding; non-compoundable offences compounded with court permission following B.S. Joshi (2003) 4 SCC 675; FIR under Sections 147, 323, 354, 504 IPC; charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order quashed; Criminal Case No. 1652 of 2024, CJM-I Dehradun; C-528 No. 1097 of 2026; Alok Mahra, J.; affidavit of compromise; video-conference identification of parties; disposal dated 03.06.2026.

What did the court decide?

Offences between the parties permitted to be compounded; entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1652 of 2024 quashed qua the applicants; FIR and charge-sheet stand quashed. ¶2

Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
directions and
Registrar’s order
with Signatures

COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS

C528 No. 1097 of 2026
Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Gaurav Kandpal and Mr. Varun Agarwal,
learned counsel for the applicants.
2.
Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned D.A.G. alongwith
Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3.
Mr. Tajhar Qayyum, learned counsel for
respondent no. 2/complainant.
4.
The present criminal misc. application is
filed with a prayer to set-aside the chargesheet,
summoning/cognizance order as well as the entire
proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1652 of 2024,
pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate-I,
Dehradun,
on
the
basis
of
compromise between the parties.
5.
In this case, an FIR was lodged by the
complainant under Sections 147, 323, 354 and
504 of IPC. After investigation, chargesheet was
also filed in the matter.

6.
Now,
parties
have
entered
into
an
agreement and they have settled their grievances.
They are present before this Court through video
conferencing and are duly identified by their
respective counsels. Respondent no. 2 submits
that he does not want to proceed with the case
against the applicants. Parties have also filed their
respective
affidavits
stating
the
facts
of
compromise between them.
7.
Compounding application is also filed in the
matter wherein it is prayed to compound the
offence between the parties.
8.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits
that the parties have amicably settled their
dispute and have entered into a compromise.
9.
Learned State Counsel raised apreliminary

objection to the effect that the offences sought to be compounded are non-compoundable.
10. However, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana
reported in (2003) 4 S.C.C., Page 675, has permitted compounding of non-compoundable offences with the permission of Court, especially in matrimonial disputes.
11. Furthermore, Hon’ble Supreme Court, in a catena of its judgments, has observed that in cases where because of the compromise arrived at between the parties, possibility of conviction is remote and bleak, the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings as continuation of the same would cause great prejudice and injustice to the accused.
12. Following the aforesaid ratio, present compounding application is allowed. The offences between the parties are permitted to be compounded. As a result, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1652 of 2024, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Dehradun, are hereby quashed qua the applicants. FIR and charge-sheet filed pursuant thereto stand quashed.
13. C-528 application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Alok Mahra J.) 03.06.2026 Ujjwal

objection to the effect that the offences sought to
be compounded are non-compoundable.

10. However, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana

reported in (2003) 4 S.C.C., Page 675, has
permitted compounding of non-compoundable
offences with the permission of Court, especially
in matrimonial disputes.

11. Furthermore, Hon’ble Supreme Court, in a
catena of its judgments, has observed that in
cases where because of the compromise arrived
at between the parties, possibility of conviction is
remote and bleak, the High Court may quash the
criminal proceedings as continuation of the same
would cause great prejudice and injustice to the
accused.

12. Following
the
aforesaid
ratio,
present
compounding application is allowed. The offences
between
the
parties
are
permitted
to
be
compounded. As a result, the entire proceedings
of Criminal Case No. 1652 of 2024, pending in the
court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-I,
Dehradun,
are
hereby
quashed
qua
the
applicants. FIR and charge-sheet filed pursuant
thereto stand quashed.

13. C-528 application stands disposed of in the
aforesaid terms.
(Alok Mahra J.)
03.06.2026
Ujjwal

Rehan Qureshi and Ors. v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rehan Qureshi and Ors. v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nitin Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Tauheed Beg and Ors. Vs State of Uttarakhand

Himanshu Joshi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Shashi Kumar Singh and Others Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohd Rizwan Alias Aman Vs State of Uttarakhand

Narendra Singh Mehra Vs State of Uttarakhand