Office Notes,

reports, orders or

SL. proceedings or

Date COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS

No directions and

Registrar’s order with Signatures

WPCRL No. 1271 of 2025

Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J .

Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the Petitioners.

2. Mr. Vipul Painuly, learned A.G.A. for the State of

Uttarakhand.

3. Mr. Subhash Joshi, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 3

and 4.

4. The present Criminal Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been instituted by the Petitioners against the Respondents, particularly Respondent Nos. 3 and 4,

with the following prayers:

“(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 25.04.2024, registered as F.I.R. No. 0286 of 2024, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 325, 341, 504, and 506 of the I.P.C., 1860, at Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar, lodged by Respondent No. 3 against the Petitioners, in view of the amicable

settlement arrived at between the parties.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 not to arrest the Petitioners and not to take any coercive measures against them in pursuance of the F.I.R. lodged by Respondent No. 3 on 25.04.2024, registered as F.I.R. No. 0286 of 2024, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 325, 341, 504, and 506 of the I.P.C., 1860, Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar, in view of the amicable settlement between the

parties.”

5. Today, the matter is listed for disposal of the Compounding Application (I.A. No. 01 of 2025, Paper No. 17), seeking permission to compound the offences on the ground that the

parties have amicably settled their dispute.

6. The application has been duly signed by both sides and endorsed by their respective learned counsel — Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the Petitioners, and Mr. Subhash Joshi, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Affidavits in support of the application have also been filed.

7. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the present Petition pertains to F.I.R. dated 25.04.2024, registered under Sections 147, 148, 307, 325, 341, 504, and 506 I.P.C., at Police Station Roorkee, District Haridwar. He further submits that though the allegations in the F.I.R. include the offence under Section 307 I.P.C., the injured is a minor, aged about ten years, who is being represented by his father, Respondent No. 3 – Afsar. The parties have now reconciled their dispute, giving rise to the present Compounding Application.

8. Today, all parties are present except Respondent No. 4, the injured Master Arshad, who is represented by his father, Respondent No. 3 – Afsar. The Petitioners are also present before this Court. They have all been duly identified by their respective counsel.

9. At the outset, this Court interacted with the parties, particularly with the complainant – the father of the victim, Arshad – who stated that his son sustained a minor injury when a stone accidentally hit him while crossing the road. On being instigated by villagers, he had lodged the present F.I.R. However, the matter has now been amicably resolved between the parties, and he does not wish to pursue the case any further.

10. Learned State Counsel opposes the Compounding Application on the ground that the case involves a serious offence