SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS C482 No.2418 of 2019 Shilini Verma ...Applicant Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another ...Respondents Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J. Mr. Pawan Mishra, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. Saurav Kumar Pandey, Advocate for respondent no.2. 1. By means of the present C482 application, the applicant has sought quashing of the charge- sheet dated 23.8.2019, cognizance order dated 29.8.2019 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun and the proceeding of criminal case no.4486 of 2019, State Vs. Shalini Verma and another under sections 406, 420, 506 and 120(B) I.P.C. and section 4/5 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act. 2. The applicant –Ms. Shalini Verma (through V.C.) and respondent no.2-Anju Sehgal are present in Court duly identified by their respective counsel Mr. Pawan Mishra and Mr. Saurav Kumar Pandey, Advocates for the applicant and respondent no.2, respectively. 3. During the pendency of the instant criminal miscellaneous application, the Compounding Application (IA No. 1 of 2025) has been filed on behalf of the applicant and respondent no.2 which is duly supported by the affidavit of applicant and respondent no.2. 4. In the affidavit in support of the Compounding, it has been stated by the respondent no.2 that during the pendency of the present criminal miscellaneous application, the parties have settled the dispute amicably and applicant has already paid entire amount to respondent no.2 and after receiving the entire disputed amount, no amount is now due to be paid to the respondent no.2. As such, the grievances of respondent no.2 have been redressed and now complainant/respondent no.2 has no grievance against the applicant any more. It is further submitted that since the offences are of personal nature and no public interest is adversely affected, it is in the interest of justice that the present matter be compounded. Affidavit on behalf of the applicant is on similar lines. 5. Learned Brief Holder for the State Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal would submit that Section 120-B IPC and section 4/5 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act are non compoundable. 6. On this, learned counsel for the applicant would state that Sections 420, 406 of IPC are compoundable with the permission of the Court and he would further submit that in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2012 (10) SCC 303, Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh, (2013) 11 SCC 497, B.S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant vs. CBI, (2008) 9 SCC 677, the compounding can be done in non compoundable cases. 7. Since the parties have already settled their disputes amicably and the respondent no.2 has stated before the Court that she does not want to pursue the matter any further, hence, in such view of the matter, letting the matter go into trial it would be a futile exercise, therefore, the compounding application deserves to be allowed. 8. The Compounding Application (IA No. 1 of 2025) is hereby allowed and the entire proceedings of criminal case no.4486 of 2019, State Vs. Shalini Verma and another under sections 406, 420, 506 and 120(B) I.P.C. and section 4/5 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun qua the applicant are hereby quashed. 9. The C482 application is, accordingly, disposed of. 10. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly. (Siddhartha Sah, J.) Ravi 02.07.2026