SURYA PRATAP RANA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) By means of the present writ petition, petitioners have put to challenge the First Information Report No.0646 of 2024 dtd. 15/10/2024, for the offences punishable under Ss. 109, 115(2) and 352 of the B.N.S. Act 2023, registered with Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar, and further not to arrest them in pursuant to impugned FIR.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned FIR was lodged in misunderstanding and with aggravated facts, which got unearthed after the complainant (petitioner No.4) and his friends met the petitioner Nos.1 to 3. He further submits that the settlement agreement dtd. 28/12/2024 (Annexure No.2 to the writ petition), underwent between both the parties without any consideration or settlement amount, but merely in bonafide and good faith, therefore, both the parties intent to quash the impugned FIR. He also submits that now the matter has amicably settled between the parties, therefore, petitioner No.4(informant) doesn't wish to prosecute the petitioner Nos.1 to 3.