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. 482 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned D.A.G. alongwith Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Vishal Vikram Singh, 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. 1951 of 2024, State Vs. Satpal Singh and Others, under Sections 147, 148, 336, 427, 504 and 506 of IPC, pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, on the basis of compromise between the parties. 5. The present case is a case of cross FIRs. It is submitted that both the parties have entered into a compromise and have agreed to withdraw all the pending cases filed against each other. 6. Compounding application is also filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offence between the parties under Sections 147, 148, 336, 427, 504 and 506 of IPC. 7. 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. 8. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise. 9. Learned State Counsel raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the offences sought to be compounded are non-compoundable. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. 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 entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1951 of 2024, State Vs. Satpal Singh and Others, under Sections 147, 148, 336, 427, 504 and 506 of IPC, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed qua the applicants. FIR and charge-sheet filed pursuant thereto stand quashed. 13. Accordingly, the present criminal misc. application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Alok Mahra J.) 27.03.2026 Ujjwal