Office Notes, reports,

SL. orders or proceedings or

Date COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS

No directions and Registrar’s

order with Signatures

WPCRL No. 91 of 2024

Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J .

Mr. M.S. Pal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by

Ms. Medha Pande, learned counsel for the Petitioners. 2. Mr. G.C. Joshi, learned A.G.A. for the State of

Uttarakhand.

3. Mr. Apoorv Chauhan, learned counsel for

Respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

4. The present Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of the Petitioners- Ashish Tomar, S/o Arun Tomar, and Vishesh Tomar, S/o Vikram Singh against the Respondents, particularly Respondent Nos. 3 and 4- Ankit Singh, S/o Upendra Kumar Singh, and

Anjaney Rai, S/o Santosh Kumar Rai.

5. It is submitted that Mr. M.S. Pal, learned Senior Counsel, has pointed out a typographical error in the Petition, wherein "S/o" has been erroneously typed as

"C/o".

6. The present Petition is filed with the following

prayers:

“(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing F.I.R. No. 0331/2023, registered under Sections 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station

Rajpur, District Dehradun, Uttarakhand.

(ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing Respondent No. 2 not to adopt any coercive measures, including

arrest of the Petitioners, in relation to the said F.I.R. No. 0331/2023.”

7. Today, the matter is listed for disposal of the Compounding Application (IA No. 01 of 2024, Paper No. 17), which seeks permission to compound the offence on the ground that the parties have amicably resolved their differences. The application is duly signed by all parties and endorsed by their respective learned counsel-Ms. Medha Pande and Mr. Vikramaditya Shah, Advocates for the Petitioners, and Mr. Apoorv Chauhan and Mr. Digvijay Singh Bisht, Advocates for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. In support of the compounding application, affidavits have been filed by the parties.

8. The learned State Counsel vehemently opposes the Compounding Application, submitting that the offences involved are non-compoundable in nature, particularly the charge under Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder), and that the injured party sustained grievous injuries.

9. Injured person Anjaney Rai, along with the complainant/Respondent No. 3- Ankit Singh, are present in-person before the Court and are duly identified by Mr. Apoorv Chauhan, Advocate. Upon interaction, the injured states that he was hurt but does not recall how the incident occurred. Upon querying the complainant/Respondent No. 3 as to how he named the accused in a case under Section 307 IPC, he states that he did not witness the incident himself and that the information was relayed