Uttarakhand High Court
WPCRL/1015/2026 of AMIT SINGH BOHARA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 3 June 2026
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No. 1015 of 2026 With Compounding Appl. No. 1 of 2026 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Chandramauli Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2.
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPCRL No. 1015 of 2026
With
Compounding Appl. No. 1 of 2026
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Mr. Chandramauli Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. Mr. Amit Kapri, learned counsel for the respondent.
4. The instant writ petition has been moved on behalf of the petitioners Amit Singh Bohara and Anjali Gobari praying for quashing of FIR dated 28.04.2026, bearing FIR No. 0021 of 2026 lodged by respondent no. 3 Govindi Devi at P.S. Jajerdewal, District Pithoragarh wherein the petitioners have been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 305 of BNS 2023.
5. This petition is filed along with the compounding application (IA No. 1 of 2026) with the affidavit of the petitioners, as well as affidavit of the respondent/ complainant.
6. It is contended that in fact respondent/ complainant is the grandmother of petitioner no. 2 and due to some misunderstanding the FIR has been lodged and the parties have now settled their dispute.
7. Both the petitioners are present in Court and identified by their respective counsel. Respondent/complainant joined the proceeding through V.C. and identified by her counsel and submits that she does not want to pursue with the impugned FIR.
8. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the State submits the offence is non- compoundable, however, with the leave of the Court same can be compounded. She further submits that since the respondent/complainant do not want to pursue with the impugned FIR, therefore, there is no useful purpose to go with the investigation since the same will be a futile exercise.
9. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that respondent/complainant does not want to pursue with the impugned FIR and as contended by learned counsel for the State that there is no useful purpose to go with the investigation since, the complainant herself does not want to pursue with the impugned FIR, this Court is of the view that the compounding application deserves to be allowed.
10. Consequently, the compounding application as well as the instant writ petition are allowed, and the impugned FIR 28.04.2026 bearing FIR No. 0021 of 2026 registered at P.S. Thana Jajerdewal, Pithoragarh is also hereby quashed.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 03.06.2026 Parul