SL. No. Dat e Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:6403 IA No.1 of 2025 (Compounding Application) With C528 No.1202 of 2025 Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. S.R.S. Gill, learned counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. Rakesh Negi, learned Brief Holder, for the State of Uttarakhand/1. 3. Mr. Naveen Singh Mer, learned counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3. 4. In the present Application filed under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, the Applicant has put a challenge to the cognizance/summoning order dated 28.03.2025 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No.74 of 2025 “State Vs. Randeep Singh @ Rana” for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115, 351 (2) and 352 of BNS, 2023 and under Section 3/25 of Arms Act, which is pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 5. Along with C528 application of BNSS, compounding application has also been filed with a prayer that the parties have come into the terms of the compromise and the matter will be decided accordingly. In the said application paper no.42, signatures have been annexed on behalf of Applicant through the learned counsel and also for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3. 6. Compounding application is strongly opposed on behalf of learned State Counsel with the submissions that there was a gunshot resulting in a person, namely, Devraj, getting injured. 7. At the outset, the injured impleaded as Respondent No.3 makes a submission before this Court in support of the compounding application that he could not identify as who shot him because there was many people, and the injury which he sustained was not of serious in nature. Whereas, the reporter the informant/Respondent No.2 Rakesh, makes a submission that he lodged a report simply because the injured Respondent No.3 Devraj got hurt, and does not know that how was he injured. 8. Today, Applicant Randeep Singh @ Rana and Respondent Nos.2 and 3, are present in person before this Court along with their respective counsels, and they have been identified by their learned counsels. In this light, as the statement made before this Court by the parties, the compounding application seems to be justified and is allowed. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 10. In view of the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 as well as in Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 115 of 2012 (Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh) decided on 06.12.2012, 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 interested to restore peace and harmony between them. 11. Keeping in view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met, if the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.74 of 2025 “State Vs. Randeep Singh @ Rana” for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115, 351 (2) and 352 of BNS, 2023 and under Section 3/25 of Arms Act, which is pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, are quashed. 12. In view of the above, the compounding application is allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.74 of 2025 “State Vs. Randeep Singh @ Rana” for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115, 351 (2) and 352 of BNS, 2023 and under Section 3/25 of Arms Act, which is pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed. 13. The Criminal Miscellaneous Application, filed under 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is disposed of accordingly. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 22.07.2025 Nitesh/