SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:6684 (Compounding Appl. No.02 of 2025) In C528 No.232 of 2024 Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Amish Tewari, learned counsel for the Applicants. 2. Mr. N.S. Kanyal, learned AGA for the State. 3. Mr. Kailash Chandra, learned counsel for respondent no.2. 4. Present application has been filed by the Applicants under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 alongwith compounding application and the same is supported with the affidavits of Applicants and Respondent no.2. 5. By means of this C528 application, Applicants have sought quashing of the impugned summoning order dated 27.05.2016 and 24.07.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.347 of 2016 State vs. Dayal Singh & others for the offence punishable under Section 376, 366, 368, 343 & 120-B of IPC pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Bageshwar, District Bageshwar. 6. As per the observation made by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.03.2025 the prosecutrix/victim/Respondent no.2 has filed a compounding application alongwith the Applicants/accused however her brother was adamant for pressing the charges and was not ready because he had filed the application in the trial court. 7. Learned counsel for the Applicants submits that considering the statement of the prosecutrix and also her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. whereby no major allegations were made against the Applicant no.1/accused-Dayal Singh Danu regarding the offence under Section 376 IPC and a final report was furnished before the learned trial court with the averments that no case is made out. 8. After the final report had been submitted by the Investigating Officer, the court had invited objections/protest petition whereby the brother of the prosecutrix/Respondent no.2 had objected to the final report in his protest petition before the court and stresses upon his protest application before the learned trial court which resulted in taking of the cognizance by the learned trial court under Section 376, 366, 368, 343 and 120-B of IPC against the accused persons, who are Applicant nos.1, 2 & 3 in the present C528 Application. 9. The Applicants and Respondent no.2/prosecutrix along with her brother-Surendra Singh Danu are present in the Court. They are duly identified by their respective counsel. 10. Though the brother of Respondent no.2/ prosecutrix, namely, Surendra Singh Danu is not a party in the present Application but he is present before this Court because of his protest petition against the final report. Learned trial court took cognizance against the accused/Applicants. The brother of the prosecutrix makes a statement that due to travel issues he had pressed the protest application; but now he does not want to press the same or proceed further on the ground that her sister (Respondent no.2 herein) is happily married and if the trial continuous or proceeds it will hinder her married life; considering the welfare of her sister (Respondent no.2) he does not wish to proceed any further. 11. Respondent no.2 also asserts with the submission made by her brother-Surendra Singh Danu, who is being identified by learned counsel Mr. Kailash Chandra. 12. The compounding application has been strongly opposed by learned State counsel on the ground that the matter is of a serious nature and is concern with the offence of rape under Section 376 of IPC, which cannot be compounded. 13. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 14. Since initially the Investigating Officer had submitted a final report finding no ground for the Court to take any cognizance still the informant (brother of the respondent no.2/prosecutrix) insisted and stressed upon his protest application whereby the court found the enough for taking the cognizance. 15. On going through the statement of the Respondent no.2/prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and considering her welfare that she is happily married and if the case proceeds, it would hamper the peace of her marital life, Besides this the complainant and the person who presses the protest petition against the final report and who is also present before this Court also submits that considering the marital life and happiness of his sister, he does not wish to proceed the matter any further . 16. In view of the principle of law laid down by Ho’ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303, criminal proceedings can be quashed by this Court, if this Court is satisfied that matter has been settled between the parties amicably and parties are interest to restore peace and harmony between them. 17. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in view of the above, the compounding application is allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.347 of 2016 State vs. Dayal Singh & others for the offence punishable under Section 376, 366, 368, 343 & 120 B of IPC pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Bageshwar, District Bageshwar are hereby quashed against respondent nos.2 & 3. 18. Accordingly instant Criminal Misc. Application stands disposed of. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 30.07.2025 Arti