HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Revision No.395 of 2025 Sompal ….....Revisionist Versus State of Uttarakhand and another ….….Respondents Present:- Ms. Indu Sharma, Advocate for the revisionist. Mr. Dinesh Chauhan, learned AGA for the State. Ms. Sangeeta Adhikari Patni, learned counsel for respondent no.2. Mr. Mahesh Chandra Pant, learned counsel for the Mediator. Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J. The present criminal revision has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 05.01.2024 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Rishikesh, District Dehradun in Criminal Appeal No.40 of 2022 (Criminal Case No.504 of 2016) titled as “Sompal & another vs. State of Uttarakhand & another” as also against the judgment and order dated 07.11.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Rishikesh, Dehradun in Criminal Case No.504 of 2016, State vs. Sompal & another, whereby the revisionist was convicted under Section 323 of the IPC and sentenced to 1 year R.I. and fine of Rs.1,000/-. 2. The revisionist-Sompal and respondent no.2-Umesh Gupta appeared through video conferencing duly indentified by Ms. Indu Sharma and Ms. Sangeeta Adhikari Patni, Advocate, respectively. Respondent no.2/complainant verified the compromise and he agreed to the compounding of the offence and allowing of the revision. 2 3. The injured Mr. Ajay Gupta S/o Mr. Umesh Gupta also appeared through video call duly indentified by Ms. Sangeeta Adhikari Patni, Advocate and made a statement that he does not wish to pursue the case any further since his father has already compounded the case, hence he too is desirous of compounding the matter and putting a quietous to the matter. 4. The present revision seeks for setting aside the impugned judgment and orders dated 05.01.2024 and 07.11.2022. 5. The parties have now entered into a compromise and the injured and respondent no.2/complainant has agreed to the compounding of this aforesaid offence under Section 323 of the IPC. The compromise is duly notarised compromise dated 12.03.2026. The same is taken on record. 6. The terms of compromise have been recorded in compromise sheet duly signed by the respective counsel for the parties and the Mediator which shall form part of this order. 7. Since the injured has agreed for the compounding of the aforesaid offence under Section 323 of the IPC, hence the criminal revision deserves to be allowed. 8. In view of the facts and circumstances, the Criminal Revision is allowed and the impugned judgment and orders dated 05.01.2024 and 07.11.2022 are set aside. 9. The revisionist/accused is acquitted of the charge under Section 323 of the IPC. (Siddhartha Sah, J.) 09.05.2026 Lok Adalat Ravi 3