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. 701 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Nishant Krishna Adhikari, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Rakshit Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3. 4. The present criminal misc. application is filed with a prayer to quash and set-aside the chargesheet, summoning order as well as the entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No. 54 of 2022, State Vs. Suraj Saun and Others, under Sections 363 r/w 34, Section 16/17 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, pending in the court of learned Special Sessions Judge (POCSO)/Session Judge, Champawat. 5. Now, Compounding Application is filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offences between the parties under Sections 452 and 506 of IPC. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise. 7. Parties are virtually 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. The Court interacted with the parties. Upon interaction, respondent no. 2 submits she has amicably settled her dispute with the applicant and they she does not want to pursue with the criminal proceedings against the applicant. 9. At this stage, 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 Special Sessions Trial No. 54 of 2022, State Vs. Suraj Saun and Others, under Sections 363 r/w 34, Section 16/17 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, pending in the court of learned Special Sessions Judge (POCSO)/Session Judge, Champawat, are hereby quashed qua the applicant. 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.) 20.04.2026 Ujjwal