No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS C-482 No. 1222 of 2018 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J. Mr. Siddhartha Jain, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Navnish Negi, learned counsel for the complainant/ respondent no. 2. 4. The present criminal misc. application is filed with the prayer to set-aside and quash the chargesheet, cognizance/ summoning order as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 125 of 2018, State Vs. Mr. Manish Verma and Another, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and 3/ 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court of learned ACJM, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal. 5. Now, Compounding Application is filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offences between the parties under Sections 498- A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and 3/ 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise. 7. 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. Applicant No. 2 (mother) could not appear before this Court, as she is bed-ridden. 8. The Court interacted with the parties. Upon interaction, respondent no. 2 submits she has amicably settled her dispute with the applicants and she does not want to pursue with the criminal proceedings against the applicant. It is further submitted that already a decree of divorce has been granted and they are living separately now. 9. At this stage, learned State Counsel raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the offences sought to be compounded are non- compoundable. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. 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. 125 of 2018, State Vs. Mr. Manish Verma and Another, under Sections 498- A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and 3/ 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court of learned ACJM, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal, are hereby quashed qua the applicants. FIR and charge-sheet filed pursuant thereto stand quashed. 13. Accordingly, the present criminal misc. application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. ( Alok Mah r a J.) 22.04.2026 Ujjwal