✦ High Court of India · 20 Jun 2025

St at e v. Manoj Raj hansh and Ot hers

Case Details High Court of India · 20 Jun 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
20 Jun 2025
Length
1,158 words

Mr. Akshay Lat wal, learned A.G.A. for t he St at e of Ut t arakhand.

3. Mr. Aayush Gaur, learned counsel for t he Respondent No. 2.

4. The present applicat ion under Sect ion 528 of t he Bharat iya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhit a, 2023 has been filed on behalf of t he applicant s- Manoj Kum ar alias Manoj Raj hansh, Shekhar s/ o Shri Suresh Kum ar, Praveen Kum ar s/ o Ram akant Kushwaha, Pram od Kum ar alias Pram od Raj hansh, and Shiva Balm iki s/ o Shri Ram Singh, seeking quashing of t he charge- sheet dat ed

08.06.2024, t he sum m oning/ cognizance order dat ed 24.09.2024, and t he ent ire proceedings of Crim inal Case No. 663 of 2024 ( arising out of Case Cr im e No. 88 of 2014) , “ St at e vs. Manoj Raj hansh and Ot hers” , for t he offence punishable under Sect ions 147, 148, 323, 325, and 504 of t he I PC, pending before t he Court of Civil Judge ( Junior Division) / Judicial Magist rat e, Bazpur, Dist rict Udham Singh Nagar.

5. I n t he present m at t er, respondent no. 2, Sachin Kum ar Ruhela, lodged an FI R at Police St at ion Bazpur, Dist r ict Udham Singh Nagar, alleging t hat on 15.02.2024, he, along w it h his fat her Shri Mahesh Chandra Ruhela, was t ravelling from t heir r esidence t o Mandi Road, Bazpur, in his Wagon R car. At about 8: 30 p.m ., when t hey reached in front of Mohit Confect ionery on Mandi Road, anot her car bear ing regist rat ion no. UK- 18-J- 7522 hit t heir vehicle from behind. As a result , bot h t he respondent no. 2 and his fat her sust ained inj ur ies. The occupant s of t he said car- Manoj Raj hansh, Pram od Raj hansh, Shekhar Raj hansh, and Praveen Kum ar assault ed t he com plainant .

6. Along w it h t he applicat ion under Sect ion 528, a Com pounding Applicat ion ( I .A. No. 1 of 2025) has been filed, duly signed by t he part ies and support ed by separat e affidavit s of t he Applicant s and Respondent no. 2. Bot h t he Applicant s and Respondent no. 2 are pr esent before t his Court and have been duly ident ified by t heir respect ive counsel.

7. Though t he inj ured person is not form ally m ade a part y t o t his applicat ion, an affidavit sworn by him annexed wit h t he Com pounding Applicat ion. Respondent no. 2 has m ade an oral subm ission before t his Court st at ing t hat he does not wish t o pursue t he m at t er any furt her, and a m ut ual set t lem ent has been reached bet ween t he part ies.

8. Heard learned counsel for t he part ies and perused t he m at erial available on record.

9. I n light of t he legal pr inciples laid down by t he Hon’ble Apex Court in Gi a n Si n g h v s. St a t e o f Pu n j a b , r e p o r t e d i n ( 2 0 1 2 ) 1 0 SCC 3 0 3 , and in Tr a n sf e r Pe t i t i o n ( Cr i m i n a l ) N o . 1 1 5 o f 2 0 1 2 ( D i m p e y Gu j r a l v s. Un i o n Te r r i t o r y o f Ch an d i g a r h ) decided on 06.12.2012, t his Court holds t hat cr im inal proceedings m ay be quashed if it is sat isfied t hat t he m at t er has been am icably set t led bet ween t he part ies and t hey are inclined t o rest ore peace and harm ony.

10. Per cont ra, learned St at e Counsel has form ally obj ect ed t o t he quashing of offences alleged in t he present case.

11. Consider ing t he overall fact s and circum st ances of t he case, t his Court is of t he view t hat t he ends of j ust ice would be m et by quashing t he ent ire proceedings of Crim inal Case No. 663 of 2024 ( ar ising out of Case Cr im e No. 88 of 2014) , t it led St at e vs. Manoj Raj hansh and Ot hers, for t he offences punishable under Sect ions 147, 148, 323, 325, and 504 I PC, pending before t he Court of Civil Judge ( Junior Division) / Judicial Magist rat e, Bazpur, Dist rict Udham Singh Nagar.

12. Accordingly, t he Com pounding Applicat ion is allowed. The ent ire proceedings of Cr im inal Case No. 663 of 2024 ( Case Crim e No. 88 of 2014) , t it led St at e vs. Manoj Raj hansh and Ot hers, pending in t he Court of Civil Judge ( Junior Division) / Judicial Magist rat e, Bazpur, Dist r ict Udham Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed.

13. The Crim inal Miscellaneous Applicat ion filed under Sect ion 528 of t he Bharat iya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhit a, 2023, is disposed of accordingly. ( A sh i sh N a i t h a n i , J.) 2 0 .0 6 .2 0 2 5 Shiksha SHIKSHA BINJOLA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3410ef86ae41ec9fbabcd5dba6b3a2c24b5aa08b09c12f21822fbd40bf639b1c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=FD80A2D028949381C52796A542D7FF0A9BED00E67B5283D205F18FE29BDF5DD9, cn=SHIKSHA BINJOLA

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments