No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS C528 No. 941 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Amit Kapri, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Mohit Pandey, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4. 4. The present criminal misc. application is filed with the prayer to set-aside and quash the chargesheet, cognizance/summoning order dated 17.07.2025 as well as the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 02 of 2025, against applicant no. 1 under Section 118(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(1)(r), s of SC/ST Act and against applicant nos. 2 and 3 under Section 118(1), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(1)(r), s of SC/ST Act, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act)/5th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dehradun, District Dehradun, on the basis of compromise between the parties. 5. In this case, an FIR was lodged by respondent no. 2 against the applicants, wherein, it was alleged that applicants severely beat them up with rod and sticks and hard blunt objects due to which they sustained injuries. After investigation, chargesheet was filed against the applicants under different sections. 6. Now, Compounding Application is filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offences between the parties. 7. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the Investigating Officer has wrongly inserted the sections under the SC/ST Act also, as the complainant does not belong to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes and the other respondents belonging to such castes are not the complainant. It is further submitted 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. The Court interacted with the parties. Upon interaction, respondent nos. 2 to 4 have submitted that they have amicably settled their dispute with the applicants and they do 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 S.S.T. No. 02 of 2025, against applicant no. 1 under Section 118(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(1)(r), s of SC/ST Act and against applicant nos. 2 and 3 under Section 118(1), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(1)(r), s of SC/ST Act, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act)/5th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dehradun, District Dehradun, 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.) 29.05.2026 Ujjwal