Yogesh Panwar Vs State of Uttarakhand

UKHC010112592026

2026:UHC:5315

SL. No.	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
			WPCRL/1219/2026
			Yogesh Panwar --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
			Mr. Nivesh Bahuguna, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Pankaj Joshi and Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. Ish Mohan Bhatt, Advocate for respondent no.3.
			2. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought quashing of F.I.R./Case Crime No.25 of 2026, under Sections 115(2), 126, 191(2), 3(5), 351(3) and 352 of B.N.S., registered at Police Station Kempty, District Tehri Garhwal. 3. A compounding application, jointly signed by counsel for respondent no. 3 and counsel for the petitioners has been filed duly supported by affidavits of the petitioners and respondent no.3 (complainant).
			4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that parties have entered into settlement, therefore, the matter needs to be compounded.
			5. Learned counsel for respondent no.3 submits that disputehasnowbeen

¶4

UKHC010112592026

¶5

2026:UHC:5315

¶6

amicably settled between the parties, therefore, his client wants to close the matter to ensure that peace is restored. 6. Today, petitioners and respondent no.3 joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing, who are duly identified by their respective counsels. They submit that they all are students and due to some misunderstanding, the impugned F.I.R. has been filed. 7. Both the parties also made a statement that, in view of the settlement, they want to close the matter. 8. Learned State Counsel submits that the investigation is still in progress and that the name of one Rishab Tyagi has also surfaced during the course of investigation, who is not a petitioner before this Court. 9. Having 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. 10. Since 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

¶7

UKHC010112592026

¶8

2026:UHC:5315

¶9

in the reality. The only consideration	for
the compromise reached between parties seems to be their desire to b the hatchet for all times to co Resolution of a dispute by way o compromise between two warring grou therefore, should attract the immed and prompt attention of a Court wh should endeavour to give full effect to same unless such compromise abhorrent to lawful composition of society or would promote savagery.	the urry me. f a ps, iate ich the is the
11. In view of above discussion, the petition is allowed. F.I.R./Case Cr No.25 of 2026, under Sections 115 126, 191(2), 3(5), 351(3) and 352 B.N.S., registered at Police Sta Kempty, District Tehri Garhwal, is her quashed along with all the proceedi emanating therefrom, qua the petitione	writ ime (2), of tion eby ngs rs.
12. Compounding application accordingly, disposed of.	is,
(Alok Mahra 03.07.20 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=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20ddd b7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB9874 46351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2026.07.03 16:15:50 +05'30'	, J.) 26

Yogesh Panwar v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh Panwar 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

Gurudev Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Rahul Vs State of Uttarakhand

Raj Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Moh. Nizamuddin Vs State of Uttarakhand

Vikas Kirola Vs State of Uttarakhand

Barkha Vs State of Uttarakhand