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. 283 of 2021 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned D.A.G. for the State. 3. Mr. Mohit Kumar Kashyap and Ms. Manju Bahuguna, learned counsel for respondent no. 2. 4. The present criminal misc. application is filed with a prayer to set-aside the chargesheet, summoning/cognizance order as well as the entire proceedings of SST No. 43 of 2021, State Vs. Kamal Jeet, under Sections 376 of IPC and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, pending in the court of learned Special Session Judge, District Udham Singh Nagar, on the basis of compromise between the parties. 5. Now, parties have entered into an agreement and they have settled their grievances. They are present before this Court and are duly identified by their respective counsels. Respondent no. 2 has submitted that she does not want to proceed with the case. Parties have also filed their respective affidavits stating the facts of compromise between them. It is also submitted that at the time of lodging of the FIR, the complainant and applicant, both were major and physical relationship, if any, was made consensually. Thus, prima facie, no case under Section 376 IPC is made out. 6. Compounding application is also filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offence between the parties under Sections 376 of IPC and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise. 8. Learned State Counsel raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the offences sought to be compounded are non- compoundable. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. Following the aforesaid ratio, present compounding application is allowed. The offences between the parties are permitted to be compounded. As a result, the entire proceedings of SST No. 43 of 2021, State Vs. Kamal Jeet, under Sections 376 of IPC and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, pending in the court of learned Special Session Judge, District Udham Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed qua the applicant. FIR and charge-sheet filed pursuant thereto stand quashed. 12. The present criminal misc. application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Alok Mahra J.) 17.03.2026 Ujjwal