No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS C-528 No. 784 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Sushil Kumar, learned counsel for the 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 Criminal Case No. 452 of 2025, State Vs. Rahil, under Sections 376, 504 and 506 of IPC, pending in the court of learned ACJM, Roorkee, District Haridwar, on the basis of compromise between the parties. 5. In this case, an FIR was lodged by respondent no. 2, wherein, it was alleged that applicant on the false pretext of marriage made physical relations with her since 2019 and when she asked him to marry her, he refused. Thereafter, the present FIR was lodged and after investigation, chargesheet was filed under Sections under Sections 376, 504 and 506 of IPC. 6. Now, Compounding Application is filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offences between the parties under Sections 376, 504 and 506 of IPC. 7. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise. 8. Parties are 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. Both the parties are major. The Court interacted with them. Upon interaction, both of them stated that they have amicably resolved their dispute and respondent no. 2 does not want to pursue with the criminal proceedings against the applicant as they both have agreed to marry each other in near future. 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 Criminal Case No. 452 of 2025, State Vs. Rahil, under Sections 376, 504 and 506 of IPC, pending in the court of learned ACJM, Roorkee, District Haridwar, 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.) 17.04.2026 Ujjwal