No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS C482 No. 285 of 2024 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Pratiroop Pande, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Ms. Radha Arya, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3/complainant. 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 S.S.T. No. 36 of 2020, State Vs. Shahvan, under Sections 363, 366A, 376 of IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned FTC/Special Judge (POCSO)/Additional Session Judge, Dehradun, on the basis of compromise between the parties. 5. In this case, a missing report was lodged by respondent no. 2 that his niece aged about 14 years is missing from the house. After investigation, the victim was recovered from the company of the applicant from Sivan, Bihar. In the statement of victim, she has recorded that she overheard her mother and grandmother of talking about her marriage and as she was in love with the victim, she by her own will, went alongwith the applicant to Bihar and after reaching there, Nikah was performed between them. As per the birth certificate of the victim issued by the Madarsa Board, her date of birth is 25.08.2000 and she has submitted that she was major on the date of her Nikah. 6. Now, Compounding Application is filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offences between the parties. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise. 8. Parties are virtually 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. 9. The Court interacted with the parties. Upon interaction, respondent no. 2 has submitted that FIR was lodged on the heat of the moment and presently, the age of the victim is 26 years. By her appearance also, it appears that the victim is major. It is further submitted by respondent no. 2 that he has amicably settled his dispute with the applicant and he does not want to pursue with the criminal proceedings against the applicant. 10. At this stage, learned State Counsel raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the offences sought to be compounded are non-compoundable. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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 S.S.T. No. 36 of 2020, State Vs. Shahvan, under Sections 363, 366A, 376 of IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned FTC/Special Judge (POCSO)/Additional Session Judge, Dehradun, are hereby quashed qua the applicant. FIR and charge-sheet filed pursuant thereto stand quashed. 14. Accordingly, the present criminal misc. application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Alok Mahra J.) 02.06.2026 Ujjwal