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. 722 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Gaurav Pawar, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for respondent no. 2. 4. The present criminal misc. application is filed with the prayer to set-aside and quash the summoning order as well as the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 90 of 2022 (New No. 719 of 2024), Krishnakant Vs. Raju @ Raju Bhatia, under Section 138 of N.I. Act, pending in the court of learned 1st Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/Judicial Magistrate, District Haridwar, on the basis of compromise between the parties. 5. In this case, a complaint was filed for alleged dishonour of cheque. During pendency of the complaint, the parties settled their dispute and the complainant have submitted that he has received the full amount of the alleged cheque, which was dishonour. 6. Compounding application is filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offence between the parties under 138 of N.I. Act. 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 applicant 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 Complaint Case No. 90 of 2022 (New No. 719 of 2024), Krishnakant Vs. Raju @ Raju Bhatia, under Section 138 of N.I. Act, pending in the court of learned 1st Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/Judicial Magistrate, District Haridwar, are hereby quashed qua the applicant. 13. Accordingly, the present criminal misc. application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Alok Mahra J.) 18.04.2026 Ujjwal