Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs Manish Gupta on 15 May, 2026
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
No Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
C-482 No. 678 of 2022
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. D.S. Patni, learned Senior Counsel,
assisted by Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, learned
counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Rakesh Joshi, learned A.G.A. for the
State.
3. Mr. Ashutosh Thakral, learned counsel for
respondent no. 2/complainant.
4. The present criminal misc. application is
filed with the prayer to quash/set-aside the
chargesheet, cognizance/summoning as well as
the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.
1798 of 2022, State Vs. Manish Gupta, under
Sections 376, 323, 427, 504 and 506 of IPC,
pending in the court of learned CJM, Dehradun
on the basis of compromise between the
parties.
5. In this case, respondent no. 2 lodged an
FIR against the applicant in which she has
alleged that the applicant and the complainant
were friends for last more than three years and
the applicant on the false pretext of marriage
established physical relations with her without
her consent. Even a bare perusal of the FIR
would reveal that even after the said incident
when the applicant have established physical
relations with the complainant, the relations
between them continued and FIR was lodged in
the case on 23.11.2021.
6. Now, Compounding Application is filed in
the matter wherein it is prayed to compound
the offences between the parties.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits
that the parties have amicably settled their
dispute and have entered into a compromise.
8. Parties are present before this Court and
are duly identified by their respective counsels.
Parties have also filed their respective affidavits
stating the facts of compromise between them.
9. The Court interacted with the parties.
Upon interaction, respondent no. 2 would
submit that FIR was lodged due to some
misunderstanding and misconception. Even
otherwise also, both of them were major at the
time of alleged incident and admittedly were in
relationship for last more than three years
before lodging of the FIR. Respondent no. 2 has
further submitted that she has amicably settled
her dispute with the applicant and she does not
want to pursue with the criminal proceedings
against the applicant.
10. At this stage, learned State Counsel raised
a preliminary objection to the effect that the
offences sought to be compounded are non-
compoundable.
11. However, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of
Haryana reported in (2003) 4 S.C.C., Page 675,
has permitted compounding of non-
compoundable offences with the permission of
Court.
12. Furthermore, Hon’ble Supreme Court, in a
catena of its judgments, has observed that in
cases where because of the compromise arrived
at between the parties, possibility of conviction
is remote and bleak, the High Court may quash
the criminal proceedings as continuation of the
same would cause great prejudice and injustice
to the accused.
13. Following the aforesaid ratio, the present
compounding application is allowed. The
offences between the parties are permitted to
be compounded. As a result, the entire
proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1798 of 2022,
State Vs. Manish Gupta, under Sections 376,
323, 427, 504 and 506 of IPC, pending in the
court of learned CJM, Dehradun, are hereby
quashed qua the applicant. FIR and charge-
sheet filed pursuant thereto stand quashed.
14. Accordingly, the present criminal misc.
application stands disposed of in the aforesaid
terms.
(Alok Mahra J.)
15.05.2026
Ujjwal
