2 L. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:11497 CRLR No.897 of 2025 With (Compounding Appl. No.02 of 2025) Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Pankaj Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the Revisionist. 2. Mr. Vikas Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Shubhash Joshi, learned counsel for Respondent no.2. 4. Present revision has been filed by the revisionist, who is in jail, under Section 438/442 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita alongwith compounding application paper no.38, which is supported with the affidavits of revisionist and respondent no.2 wherein parties have annexed their signatures. 5. By means of this revision, revisionist has sought quashing of the impugned judgment and order dated 10.12.2025 passed by learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital in Criminal Appeal No.03 of 2025 Pawan Kumar Chand vs. State of Uttarakhand and Another as well as the judgment and order dated 16.12.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital in Criminal Case No.1874 of 2021 Khelendra Singh vs. Pawan Kumar Chand under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. 6. Revisionist, who is in jail, appearing through V.C. from District Jail, Nainital and respondent no.2 is present in the Court. They are duly identified by their respective counsels. 7. Learned counsel for the parties have filed their respective affidavits along with the compounding application stating therein that they do not wish to pursue the present criminal case any further and a compromise has been entered between them. 8. After interacting with respondent no.2- Khelendra Singh Mawari, who submits that he has paid the total amount to the revisionist, it is evident that the matter has been resolved between the parties. 9. Revisionist, who is in judicial custody in District Jail, Nainital has been put to face to face through V.C. by the Jailer concerned. On interacting with the revisionist, through V.C., this Court is satisfied that the grounds are sufficient to compound the matter. 10. Learned State counsel has opposed the compounding application stating that some of the offences are non-compoundable. 11. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 12. 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. 13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in view of the above, the compounding application is allowed. The entire proceedings arising out of the Criminal Appeal No.03 of 2025 as well as Criminal Case No.1874 of 2021 pending in the court of Learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital and learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital are hereby quashed. 14. Accordingly, the criminal revision stands disposed of. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 23.12.2025 Arti ARTI SINGH Digitally signed by ARTI SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=487ed955e722ba65aab55409e686c12fb83a19325e8b66890fbee418e7b69c0d, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=26DC90E00D839E3E8714131F235087D2D87E133C57E7F4A7B2E734BE2521F982, cn=ARTI SINGH Date: 2025.12.23 16:56:34 +05'30'