2025:UHC:5400 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C482 No. 606 of 2015 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Karan Anand and Ms. Stuti Pande, proxy counsel for Mr. Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy A.G. for the State. 3. Ms. Sarita Bisht and Mr. Piyush Sammal, learned counsel for respondent no.2. 4. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 29.07.2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate – II, Dehradun in Criminal Case No. 2588 of 2015 ‘State Vs. Dharmabir Singh Negi’ under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. 5. Learned counsel for the parties would submit that both parties have settled their dispute amicably. Respondent no.2/complainant no longer wishes to pursue the case. A joint compounding application (IA/742/2025), along with individual affidavits, has been filed to support this. 6. On 20.06.2025, both the petitioner and respondent no.2 appeared before the Court in person. Today, they appeared again via video conferencing and were identified by their respective lawyers. 7. On interaction, respondent no.2/complainant stated that the FIR was registered due to a misunderstanding, and since they are neighbours, the dispute has now been resolved outside the Court. Therefore, he has no objection to quashing the case. 2025:UHC:5400 8. Learned State Counsel opposed the compounding application on the ground that alleged Sections 323, 504, and 506 of I.P.C. are compoundable offenses. However, Section 325 IPC is compoundable only with the permission of the court. 9. The Court observed that since the matter has been settled, the possibility of conviction is remote. Continuing the proceedings would be unfair and not serve the ends of justice. 10. So far as compounding of non- compoundable offence is concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with the consequence of a compromise in this regard in the case of B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, reported in (2003)4 SCC 675 and has held that FIRs can be quashed to secure justice, even for non-compoundable offences. In the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 160], the Hon’ble Supreme Court also held that High Courts have broader powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings, even if offences are not compoundable. 11. In view of the above, compounding application (IA/742/2025) is hereby allowed. The compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted. The cognizance/summoning order dated 29.07.2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate– II, Dehradun in Criminal Case No. 2588 of 2015 ‘‘State Vs. Dharmabir Singh Negi’’ is hereby quashed. Consequently, the C-482 petition is allowed. (Alok Mahra, J.) 25.06.2025 Mamta 2025:UHC:5400