2026:UHC:1445 SL. No. Dat e Of f ice Not es, r epor t s, or ders or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS Com pou n d in g App licat ion ( I A No. 0 2 of 2 0 2 4 ) I n CRLA No. 7 1 9 of 2 0 2 4 Yogesh Kumar Gautam --Appellant Ver su s State of Uttarakhand --Respondents Hon 'ble Ash ish Nait h an i, J., Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the Appellant. 2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Susheel Kumar, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Pankaj Semwal, learned counsel for the Complainant and victim. 4. The present Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 20.11.2024, passed by the learned F.T.S.C./Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Sessions Trial No. 75 of 2023, “State vs. Yogesh Kumar Gautam,” arising out of Police Station Kotwali Gangnahar, District Haridwar, whereby the learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the Appellant under Section 376 IPC to undergo seven years’ rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the Appellant was further directed to undergo one year’s additional simple imprisonment. 5. As per the last order sheet dated 13.02.2026, the parties were referred to the learned Secretary, DLSA, Haridwar and a report was called for. 6. As per the report received, the parties have arrived at a compromise. 7. Along with the present Criminal Appeal, a joint Compounding Application (I.A. No. 02 of 2025) has been filed, duly signed by the parties and supported by their respective affidavits, stating that they have amicably settled the dispute and praying that the matter be compounded. 8. The Appellant is present in Court and is duly identified by Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate. The victim is appearing through video conferencing and is duly identified by Mr. Susheel Kumar, Advocate. 9. Learned State Counsel has opposed the Compounding Application on the ground that the offence under Section 376 IPC is not compoundable. 10. After interacting with the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the compromise has been entered into voluntarily and without any coercion. The Court is satisfied that the compromise is genuine. 11. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the Compounding Application is allowed. The compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted. Consequently, the judgment and order dated 20.11.2024, passed by the learned F.T.S.C./Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Sessions Trial No. 75 of 2023, is hereby quashed and set aside insofar as it relates to the present Appellant, in terms of the compromise. 12. The Criminal Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. ( Ash ish Nait h an i, J.) 2 7 .0 2 - 2 0 2 6 SB