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. 666 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. J.C. Karnatak and Mr. Prasanna Karnatak, learned counsels 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. Sanjay Kumar Chandel, learned counsel for respondent no. 2. 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 Special Sessions Trial No. 47 of 2024, State Vs. Ravindra Bhatt @ Ravish @ Ravi Bhatt and Others, under Sections 127(2), 137(2), 142, 70(2) and 74 of BNS r/w Section 5(g)/6 and 7/8 of POCSO, pending in the court of learned Special Sessions Judge (POCSO)/Sessions Judge, Champawat, on the basis of compromise between the parties. 5. In this case, the brother of the victim lodged an FIR, wherein, it was alleged that the applicants and the victim were sitting in the Canter of which the applicant no. 1 is the driver and some villager passing nearby saw them and he reported it to the complainant (brother of the victim) and thereafter this complaint was lodged. After investigation, chargesheet was filed under Sections 127(2), 137(2), 142, 70(2) and 74 of BNS r/w Section 5(g)/6 and 7/8 of POCSO Statements of the victim were recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS and thereafter she was examined as PW1. In her statement given as PW1, she has totally denied the prosecution story and have submitted that she took a lift in the vehicle which was driven by applicant no. 1 as she was going to collect grass and firewood from the forest; no incident ever happened with her and the report was lodged by the complainant only on the hearsay statement given by some passerby villager, who saw the victim in the vehicle. The complainant also denied the whole incident and stated that he has lodged the FIR on the hearsay statements of the other villagers. After attaining the age of majority, the victim has married some other person. Since, the victim and the complainant denied the whole incident and there is no material evidence on record to corroborate the prosecution story, prima facie, charges under Sections 127(2), 137(2), 142, 70(2) and 74 of BNS r/w Section 5(g)/6 and 7/8 of POCSO are not made out. 6. Compounding application is also filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offences between the parties under Sections 127(2), 137(2), 142, 70(2) and 74 of BNS r/w Section 5(g)/6 and 7/8 of POCSO. 7. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise. 8. 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. 9. Upon interaction, it is stated by respondent no. 2 that they have amicably resolved their dispute and he does not want to pursue with the criminal proceedings against the applicants. 10. At this stage, learned State Counsel raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the offences sought to be compounded are non- compoundable. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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 Special Sessions Trial No. 47 of 2024, State Vs. Ravindra Bhatt @ Ravish @ Ravi Bhatt and Others, under Sections 127(2), 137(2), 142, 70(2) and 74 of BNS r/w Section 5(g)/6 and 7/8 of POCSO, pending in the court of learned Special Sessions Judge (POCSO)/Sessions Judge, Champawat are hereby quashed qua the applicants. FIR and charge-sheet filed pursuant thereto stand quashed. 14. Accordingly, the present criminal misc. application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Alok Mahra J.) 15.04.2026 Ujjwal