UKHC010146732026 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C528/1824/2026 Manju Devi --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Abhishek Verma, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Ms. Aishwarya Thapliyal, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr. Arjun Arora, learned counsel for respondent no. 2. 4. The instant petition is preferred under Section 528 of BNSS 2023 along with compounding application IA No. 1 of 2026 supported with the affidavits of the applicant and respondent no. 2 who are also present in Court and are identified by their counsel. 5. It is contended in the compounding application that in fact the applicant was the tenant of respondent no. 2 who was living with her husband and there were minor issues, consequently, respondent no. 2 lodged the FIR though there was no any such issue as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is lodged by the respondent on 16.12.2018 bearing FIR No. 0305 of 2015 at P.S. I.T.I. District Udham Singh Nagar and after thorough investigation the applicant is charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 388 and 116 of IPC. It is submitted that after this FIR, the husband of the applicant died and now taking into consideration the UKHC010146732026 hardship of the applicant, the complainant has decided to close this proceeding and even otherwise applicant left the rented accommodation owned by the respondent. 6. The complainant who is present in Court submits that he does not want to pursue the proceeding arising out of the Case Crime No. 1111 of 2020, therefore, same may be closed as he has settled all the disputes with the applicant. 7. On the other side, Ms. Meenakshi Sharma learned A.G.A. for the State submits that though the offence are not compoundable but taking into consideration the nature of allegations with the leave of the Court the offence can be compounded. 8. After hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the grounds as taken in the compounding application and further taking into consideration the nature of the allegations, this Court is of the view there is no useful purpose to continue with the proceeding. 9. Accordingly, compounding application and the instant C528 application are allowed. Consequently, the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1111 of 2020 (Case Crime NO. 305 of 2018) State vs. Avesh Yadav and other, pending in the court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur District U.S. Nagar is hereby quashed. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 24-08-2026 Parul