Sunday, 12, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

C528/427/2026
2026 Latest Caselaw 2012 UK

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2012 UK
Judgement Date : 17 March, 2026

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

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.

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

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH

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'

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Media

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter