2025:UHC:10310 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc Application No.2071 of 2025 20th November, 2025 Manoj Bisht and Ors. ……….Applicants Versus State of Uttarakhand and another ………..Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Rajat Mittal, Advocate for the applicants. Ms. S.B. Dobhal, B.H. for the State. Mr. Aditya Birla, Advocate for respondent no.2, through video conferencing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. The present C528 application has been filed by the applicants for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 10.07.2024, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Dehradun in Criminal Case No.5542 of 2024, State Vs. Manoj Bisht & others, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered with Police Station Basant Vihar, Dehradun as well as charge sheet dated 10.07.2024 in Case Crime No.07 of 2024. 2. A joint compounding application has been moved on behalf of the parties, supported by their respective affidavits, seeking to compound offences under the aforesaid sections. 3. In the compounding application, it has been stated that the dispute between the parties is purely matrimonial and applicant no.1 (husband) and respondent no.2 (wife) have entered into a compromise and decided to live separately in future. 1 2025:UHC:10310 4. Both – applicants and respondent no.2 are present before this Court, through video conferencing, who are duly identified by their respective counsel. On interaction with the parties, they stated that they have amicably settled their dispute and does not want to continue with the present criminal proceedings. 5. On interaction with applicant no.1 and respondent no.2, it is revealed that they have decided to part ways and for that they have filed a suit for mutual divorce under Section 27 of the Uniform Civil Code, 2024, which is registered as Original Suit No.649 of 2025, Manoj Bisht Vs. Neelam Rawat, in the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, wherein the date of second motion is fixed on 19.12.2025. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has raised objection to compounding in the present case on the ground that the offence is non-compoundable. 7. 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 as below: - “12. The special features in such matrimonial matters are evident. It becomes the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes. 14. There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498-A in the Penal Code, 1860 was to prevent torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498-A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hypertechnical view would be counterproductive and would act against interests of women and against the object for which this provision was added. There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women from settling earlier. That is not the object of Chapter XX-A of the Penal Code, 1860. 2 2025:UHC:10310 15. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code.” 8. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that since the parties have reached to the terms of the compromise, there would remain a remote or bleak possibility of conviction in this case. It can also safely be inferred that it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to permit continuation of the criminal proceedings. Since the answer to the aforesaid points is in affirmative, this Court finds it a fit case to permit the parties to compound the matter. 9. Accordingly, Compounding Application (IA No.1 of 2025) is allowed. The offences between the parties are permitted to be compounded. As a result, the impugned summoning order dated 10.07.2024, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Dehradun as well as the Criminal Case No.5542 of 2024, State Vs. Manoj Bisht & others, F.I.R. under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered with Police Station Basant Vihar, Dehradun, and charge sheet dated 10.07.2024 in Case Crime No.07 of 2024, against the applicants stand quashed. 10. Accordingly C528 application stands disposed- off, in the aforesaid terms. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 20.11.2025 SK 3