Allowed¶8

Vipul Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC1 Jun 2026C528/738/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Uttarakhand High Court; C-528 No.738 of 2026; decided 01.06.2026 by Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.; compounding of offence allowed on basis of amicable compromise between applicant and respondent no.2 supported by affidavit; despite opposition by State counsel (Manoj Bhatt, Brief Holder); charge sheet dated 30.11.2017, cognizance/summoning order dated 27.11.2018 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.304 of 2018 before ACJM Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar quashed; ratio relied upon: where compromise makes conviction remote and bleak, High Court may quash criminal proceedings to avoid prejudice and injustice to accused.

What did the court decide?

Offences between the parties permitted to be compounded; charge sheet dated 30.11.2017, cognizance/summoning order dated 27.11.2018 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.304 of 2018 (ACJM, Kashipur, Udham Singh Nagar) quashed; C-528 application disposed of.

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.738 of 2026
Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Maneesh Bisht, Advocate for the
applicant.
Mr. Manoj Bhatt, Brief Holder for
the State of Uttarakhand.
Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate for
respondent no.2.

2.
Present C-528 application is filed
with the prayer to set-aside/quash the
charge
sheet
dated
30.11.2017,
cognizance/summoning
order
dated
27.11.2018 and the entire proceedings of
Criminal Case No.304 of 2018, pending
in the Court of learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District
Udham Singh Nagar on the basis of
compromise between the parties.
3.
Compounding application (I.A. No.2
of 2026) is also filed in the matter
wherein it is prayed to compound the
offence between the parties.

4.
Applicant as well as respondent
no.2 are present in Court today, who
have
been
duly
identified
by
their
learned counsel. It is further submitted
that the respondent no.2 has already
filed
affidavit
in
support
of
the
compounding application, affirming the
factum
of
compromise
arrived
at
between the parties.
5.
It is jointly submitted by the parties
that all disputes and differences arising
between
them
have
been
amicably
settled and resolved outside the Court

through mutual consent. In view of the
amicable settlement arrived at between the parties and the resolution of all their disputes, respondent no.2 has categorically stated that he does not wish to pursue or prosecute the present criminal proceedings against the applicant and has no objection if the same are brought to an end in accordance with law.
6. Learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the compounding application.
7. 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.
8. 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 Criminal Case No.304 of 2018, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District
Udham Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed.
9. C-528 application stands disposed of. (Alok Mahra, J.) 01.06.2026 Arpan

through mutual consent. In view of the

amicable settlement arrived at between
the parties and the resolution of all their
disputes,
respondent
no.2
has
categorically stated that he does not
wish to pursue or prosecute the present
criminal
proceedings
against
the
applicant and has no objection if the
same
are
brought
to
an
end
in
accordance with law.

6.
Learned State Counsel vehemently
opposed the compounding application.

7.
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.

8.
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
Criminal Case No.304 of 2018, pending
in the Court of learned Additional Chief
Judicial
Magistrate,
Kashipur,
District

Udham
Singh
Nagar,
are
hereby
quashed.

9.
C-528 application stands disposed
of.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
01.06.2026
Arpan

Vipul Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipul Kumar 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brahmchari Sudhanand Vs State of Uttarakhand

Jeevan Singh Khetwal Vs State of Uttarakhand

Modern Fashion Boutique Vs Sushma Sharma

Bhawna Sharma and Anr. Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sbfc Finance Ltd. Vs State of Uttarakhand

Dulli Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand