2026:UHC:609 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C528/88/2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Ms. Lata Negi, proxy counsel for Mr. B.M. Pingal, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Sachin Panwar proxy counsel for Mr. M.S. Bisht, learned counsel for respondent no.2. 4. The present C-528 application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet as well as the cognizance/summoning order dated 21.01.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal in Criminal Case No. 288 of 2023, arising out of F.I.R. No. 64 of 2022, registered at Police Station Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 313 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending before the said court, on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties. 5. A Compounding Application (I.A. No. 2 of 2026) has been filed along with affidavits sworn by the applicant(s) as well as respondent no.2 (complainant), wherein it has been categorically averred that the parties have amicably resolved all their matrimonial disputes and that respondent no.2 does not 2026:UHC:609 wish to pursue the criminal proceedings any further. 6. The applicant(s) and respondent no.2 are present before this Court through Video Conferencing and have been duly identified by their respective counsel. Upon interaction, they have reiterated that the dispute has been settled voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence. It is further stated that the parties have already moved an application under Section 27(1) of the Uniform Civil Code seeking divorce by mutual consent, and respondent no.2 has unequivocally expressed her unwillingness to continue the prosecution against the applicants. 7. This Court has considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and has perused the compromise application as well as the affidavits on record. The offences in question arise out of a purely matrimonial dispute having overwhelmingly private and personal character. No larger public interest is involved. 8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, has held that the High Court, in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Article 226 of the Constitution, may quash criminal proceedings arising out of matrimonial or family 2026:UHC:609 disputes where the parties have settled the matter amicably and continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of law. 9. In the present case, continuation of the criminal proceedings, despite the complete settlement between the parties, would serve no fruitful purpose and would only result in unnecessary harassment to both sides. 10. Accordingly, the compounding application is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 288 of 2023, arising out of F.I.R. No. 64 of 2022, pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal, are hereby quashed. 11. The present C-528 application is, accordingly, allowed. 12. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. [ (Alok Mahra, J.) Vacation Judge 21.01.2026 Mamta 2026:UHC:609