No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS C528 No. 1238 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Ms. Radha Arya, learned counsel for the complainant/respondent no. 2. 4. The present criminal misc. application is filed with a prayer to set-aside the chargesheet, summoning/cognizance order as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 8923 of 2024, State Vs. Rahul Sharma and Others, under Sections 498-A, 504 and 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court of learned ACJM I, District Dehradun, on the basis of compromise between the parties. 5. In this case, applicant no. 1 and respondent no. 2 were married on 01.07.2019. After some time, matrimonial discord took place between them and subsequently, respondent no. 2 filed a complaint against the applicants under Sections 498-A, 504 and 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. After investigation, chargesheet was also filed under same 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 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 no. 2 has submitted that applicant no. 1 and respondent no. 2 have decided to live separately pursuant to which first motion has been filed under Section 27 of UCC. It is further submitted that she has amicably settled her dispute with the applicants and she does not want to pursue with the criminal proceedings against the applicants. Upon interaction, it is further informed by the parties that applicant no. 1 would pay a sum of Rs. 5.5 Lakhs to the complainant, out of which, Rs. 2.5 Lakhs has been paid at the time of filing of the first motion and the remaining amount would be paid at the time of filing of the second motion. 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 Criminal Case No. 8923 of 2024, State Vs. Rahul Sharma and Others, under Sections 498-A, 504 and 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the court of learned ACJM I, 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.) 03.06.2026 Ujjwal