Allowed¶9

N v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC5 May 2026C528/650/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Uttarakhand High Court, Alok Mahra J., 05.05.2026, C528 No.650 of 2026: C-528 application allowed; offences compounded on basis of compromise between applicant and respondent no.2; charge sheet dated 13.07.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated 22.08.2025 and entire proceedings of Inquiry No.24 of 2025 before Juvenile Justice Board, Haldwani, Nainital quashed; victim attained majority; P.W.1 and P.W.2 denied F.I.R. allegations and Section 180 B.N.S.S. statements; State counsel opposed compounding; Supreme Court compromise-quashing ratio followed.

What did the court decide?

Compounding application (I.A. No.2 of 2022) allowed; offences between the parties permitted to be compounded; entire proceedings of Inquiry No.24 of 2025 pending before the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Haldwani, Nainital quashed; C-528 application stands disposed of.

N Vs State of Uttarakhand — Uttarakhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet dated 13.07.2025, the cognizance/summoning order dated 22.08.2025 and the entire proceedings of Inquiry No.24 of 2025 pending before the Juvenile Justice Board, Haldwani, Nainital should be set aside/quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties. +1 more

¶2

Court's answer

Following the ratio noticed from the Hon'ble Supreme Court (that where, because of a compromise between the parties, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak, the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings), the entire proceedings of Inquiry No.24 of 2025 pending before the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Haldwani, Nainital are quashed.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

The compounding application is allowed and the offences between the parties are permitted to be compounded.

¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise — C528 No.650 of 2026, decided by the High Court of Uttarakhand (Alok Mahra, J., 05.05.2026). Applicant sought quashing of the charge sheet dated 13.07.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated 22.08.2025 and the entire proceedings of Inquiry No.24 of 2025 pending before the Juvenile Justice Board, Haldwani, Nainital, arising from an F.I.R. lodged by respondent no.2 alleging pregnancy of her minor daughter, who disclosed the applicant's name and stated a consensual relationship of two years. Compounding application (I.A. No.2 of 2022) filed; victim (P.W.1) and complainant (P.W.2) categorically denied the allegations, including earlier statements under Section 180 of the B.N.S.S.; parties filed affidavits affirming the compromise; respondent no.2 submitted the victim had attained majority and the F.I.R. was lodged due to misunderstanding; State counsel opposed. Following the Supreme Court's ratio that where a compromise makes the possibility of conviction remote and bleak the High Court may quash criminal proceedings, the Court allowed the compounding application, permitted the offences to be compounded, quashed the entire proceedings of Inquiry No.24 of 2025, and disposed of the C-528 application.

¶1

2026:UHC:3394

¶2

SL. No.	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C528 No.650 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
			Mr. Gaurav Kandpal, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.S. Pal, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand. Ms. Aashna Parashar, Advocate for respondent no.2. 2. Present C-528 application is filed with the prayer to set-aside/quash the charge sheet dated 13.07.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated 22.08.2025 and the entire proceedings of Inquiry No.24 of 2025, pending before learned Juvenile Justice Board, Haldwani, Nainital, on the basis of compromise between the parties.
			3. An F.I.R. was lodged by respondent no. 2 alleging therein that her minor daughter was unwell and was taken for medical examination. Upon conducting an ultrasound, it was revealed that she was approximately 13 weeks pregnant. When the complainant inquired about the said pregnancy from her daughter, she disclosed the name of the applicant and stated that she was in a consensual relationship with him for the past two years and that they were in love with each other.
			4. Compounding application (I.A. No.2 of 2022) is also filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offence between the parties. The statements of the victim and the complainant have already been recorded as P.W.1 and P.W.2 respectively, wherein both of them have categorically denied the allegations made in the F.I.R. as well as the statements earlier given under Section 180 of the B.N.S.S. 5. Parties are present in Court today, who have been duly identified by their learned counsel. It is submitted that parties have already filed affidavits in support of the compounding application, affirming the factum

¶3

2026:UHC:3394

¶4

of compromise arrived at between the parties. Respondent no.2 submits that the victim has attained the age of majority and, due to some misunderstanding, the F.I.R. was lodged.
6. It is jointly submitted that all disputes and differences between the parties have been amicably settled and resolved.
7. Learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the compounding application.
8. 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.
9. Following the aforesaid ratio, present compounding application is allowed. The offences between the parties are permitted to be compounded. As a result, entire proceedings of Inquiry No.24 of 2025, pending before learned Juvenile Justice Board, Haldwani, Nainital, are hereby quashed.
10. C-528 application stands disposed of.
(Alok Mahra, J.) 05.05.2026 Arpan
ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c04853654 45e3a20dddb7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454 C5109CB987446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2026.05.05 17:50:53 +05'30'

N v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nidhi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Naresh Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Chand Khan Vs Mohd Anees

Lalit Kumar Giri Vs Gulzar

Abhishek Negi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Pati Ram Vs State of Uttarakhand