Advertisement
Advertisement

― Advertisement ―

HomeC528/427/2026 on 17 March, 2026

C528/427/2026 on 17 March, 2026

ADVERTISEMENT

Uttarakhand High Court

C528/427/2026 on 17 March, 2026

                                                                  2026:UHC:1884

              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               C528/427/2026

                               Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel for the
applicant.

2. Mr. S.C. Dumkal, learned A.G.A. for the
State.

SPONSORED

3. Ms. Poonam Rauthan, learned counsel
for respondent no.2.

4. Present C-528 application has been filed
seeking quashing of the charge-sheet as well
as the cognizance/summoning order dated
05.12.2015 passed by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, District Dehradun in
Criminal Case No. 934 of 2024, for the
offences punishable under Sections 420, 313,
506 and 376 I.P.C., pending in the court of
learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Vikasnagar, District Dehradun, along with the
entire criminal proceedings arising therefrom.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would
submit that the respondent no.2/complainant
had initially filed an application under Section
156(3)
Cr.P.C., alleging therein that the
applicant had established physical relations
with her on the pretext of marriage and had
sexually assaulted her. It was further alleged
that the applicant was already a married
person. Pursuant to the said application, the
matter was investigated by the Investigating
Officer and, after completion of investigation, a
charge-sheet was submitted against the
applicant, on the basis of which the learned
trial court took cognizance and summoned the
applicant to face trial.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant would
2026:UHC:1884

further submit that respondent no.2 is also a
widow and that the dispute between the
applicant and respondent no.2 has arisen out
of personal differences between them. It is
submitted that the applicant and the
complainant/respondent no.2 have now
amicably settled their dispute and do not wish
to pursue the criminal proceedings any
further. In this regard, a joint compounding
application (I.A. No.1 of 2026), duly supported
by the affidavits of the applicant as well as
respondent no.2, has been filed before this
Court stating that the complainant does not
intend to prosecute the applicant and that the
parties have resolved their dispute amicably.

7. The applicant as well as respondent
no.2/complainant are present through Video
Conferencing before the Court and have been
duly identified by their respective counsel.
Upon interaction with the Court, both the
parties have categorically stated that the
dispute between them has been amicably
settled and that respondent no.2 does not
wish to pursue the criminal proceedings
against the applicant any further.

8. Learned State Counsel opposes the
application on the ground that the allegations
include offences punishable under Sections
313
and 376 I.P.C., which are non-
compoundable in nature. However, he does
not dispute the factum of compromise arrived
at between the parties or the filing of the joint
compounding application.

9. Heard learned counsel for the parties
and perused the material available on record.

10. From the material placed on record, it
appears that the dispute between the
applicant and respondent no.2 arose out of a
personal relationship between them. The
2026:UHC:1884

parties have now amicably resolved their
dispute. A joint compounding application (I.A.
No.1 of 2026), supported by their respective
affidavits, has also been filed before this
Court, wherein respondent no.2 has
categorically stated that she does not wish to
pursue the criminal proceedings against the
applicant.

11. Although the offences under Sections
313
and 376 I.P.C. are non-compoundable, it
is well settled that the High Court, in exercise
of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482
Cr.P.C., may quash criminal proceedings in
appropriate cases in order to secure the ends
of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of
the Court, even in respect of non-
compoundable offences, if the Court is
satisfied that the compromise between the
parties is genuine and continuation of the
proceedings would serve no useful purpose.

12. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian
Singh vs. State of Punjab
, (2012) 10 SCC 303
and Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2014)
6 SCC 466 has held that criminal proceedings
having overwhelmingly civil or personal
flavour may be quashed on the basis of a
compromise between the parties, even though
the offences are non-compoundable, if the
Court is satisfied that the compromise is
genuine and that continuation of the
proceedings would amount to abuse of the
process of law.

13. In the present case, this Court is
satisfied that the compromise arrived at
between the parties is voluntary, genuine and
without any coercion. The complainant herself
has appeared before the Court and has stated
that she does not wish to prosecute the
applicant any further.

2026:UHC:1884

14. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case, as well as the law
laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, this
Court is of the view that continuation of the
criminal proceedings would serve no useful
purpose and that this is a fit case to exercise
the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
in order to secure the ends of justice.

15. Accordingly, the compounding
application (I.A. No.1 of 2026) is allowed.

16. Consequently, the charge-sheet as well
as the cognizance/summoning order dated
05.12.2015 passed by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, District Dehradun in
Criminal Case No. 934 of 2024, for the
offences punishable under Sections 420, 313,
506 and 376 I.P.C., pending in the court of
learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Vikasnagar, District Dehradun, along with the
entire criminal proceedings arising therefrom,
are hereby quashed.

17. The present C-528 application is,
accordingly, allowed.

18. Pending applications, if any, shall stand
disposed of.



          MAMTA
                                                               (Alok Mahra J.)
Mamta
          RANI                                                     17.03.2026
          Digitally signed by MAMTA RANI

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=6a812005bebfcf46f244f3e584af1449e430ef900
bf09a6d67ebbd642671329b, postalCode=263001,
st=Uttarakhand,
serialNumber=5de1751a4f1d9cabfd54852c9e68911ca8b
66dd26690a191648ab5d8dd004ef0, cn=MAMTA RANI
Date: 2026.03.19 14:54:57 +05’30’



Source link