Uttarakhand High Court
C528/152/2026 of USMAN Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 4 February 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C528/152/2026 Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J. Mr. Abhishek Verma, learned counsel for the appellant applicant. 2. Mr. Vipul Painuli,
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.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
C528/152/2026
Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J.
Mr. Abhishek Verma, learned counsel for the appellant applicant.
2. Mr. Vipul Painuli, learned AGA and Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, Brief Holder for the State.
3. Ms. Aishwarya Thapliyal, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.
4. By means of present Application under Section 528 of the Bhartyia Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant has sought quashing of the cognizance order dated 08.10.2025, charge-sheet dated 23.09.2025 as well as the entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 241 of 2025 (Case Crime No. 296 of 2025), State vs. Usman, under Sections 115(2), 352 and 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at PS Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.
5. The applicant no. 1 and respondent no.2 have filed a Compounding Application styled as Compromise Application No. 2 of 2026 and have sought to quash the cognizance order, charge- sheet and the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case.
6. Today, the respondent no.2 is present in person duly identified by her counsel Ms. Aishwarya Thapliyal, Advocate. On an interaction with the respondent no.2, she states before this
Court that she wants to move further in her life and does not want to prosecute the applicant.
7. Counsel for the state has raised objection that the offences are not compoundable.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon a Judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Madras, passed in Crl. O.P. No. 27905 of 2025, decided on 14.10.2025, and referred para 4 and 15 of the said judgment.
9. In view of the statement of respondent no.2 and in the interest of justice, the Compounding Application deserves to be allowed and the same is allowed. Accordingly, the proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 241 of 2025 (Case Crime No. 296 of 2025), State vs. Usman, under Sections 115(2), 352 and 69 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at PS Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, pending in the Court of learned Additional District Judge/FTSC, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed. Let the applicant be released on bail, if not required in any other case.
10. Registry is directed to inform the Jail authority accordingly.
11. The pending application(s), Urgency Application and the Criminal Misc. Application stand disposed of accordingly.
(Siddhartha Sah, J.)
Vacation Judge
04.02.2026 Kaushal