UKHC010180262025 2026:UHC:5573 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc Application No. 2039 of 2025 08 July, 2026 Manvendra Singh And Ors --Applicants Versus State Of Uttarakhand and Another --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. Vipul Panuly, learned AGA for the State. Mr. Nivesh Bahuguna, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J. Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Mr. Vipul Painuly, learned AGA for the State/respondent no.1. 3. Mr. Nivesh Bahuguna, learned counsel for the respondent no.2. 4. By means of the present Criminal Misc. Application under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, the applicants have sought quashing of the cognizance and summoning order dated 15.01.2025 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.2715 of 2025, ‘State vs. Manvendra Singh and Others”, under Sections 323, 498A, 504, 506 of IPC AND Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, at police station Rajpur, District Dehradun pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, District Dehradun. 5. During the pendency of the instant Criminal Misc. 1 UKHC010180262025 2026:UHC:5573 application before this Court, the applicants and the respondent no.2 have jointly filed a Compounding Application (No.03 of 2026) with the prayer that this instant application may be allowed and the Criminal Case No. 2715 of 2025, ‘State vs. Manvendra Singh and Others” F.I.R. No.0033 of 2024, under Sections 323, 498A, 504, 506 of IPC AND Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, at police station Rajpur, District Dehradun pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, District Dehradun may be quashed. 6. Applicant no.1-Manvendra Singh, applicant no.2- Gaur Singh Punidr and applicant no.3-Smt. Godambari Devi are present through video conferencing. They are duly identified by Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate. 7. The respondent no.2 – Suman Kandari along with Mr. Abhishek Nautiyal, Advocate is also present through video conferencing. The respondent no.2 is duly identified by Mr. Nivesh Bahuguna, Advocate. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties on Compounding Application (IA No.03 of 2026). 9. The said application is duly supported by the affidavits of the applicant no.1, applicant no.2, applicant no.3 on the one side and the respondent no.2- victim/complainant on the other side. 10. In the Compounding Application, both the parties have stated that the parties have came into terms and decided to settle the dispute outside the court. They further stated that the applicant No.1 and informant have already settled the dispute out of the court and decided to be separated mutually and have filed a divorce petition under Section 27 of Uniform Civil Code (Section 13B) for mutual divorce. 2 UKHC010180262025 2026:UHC:5573 11. Learned counsel for the applicants further states that the applicants have already given Rs.5,10,000/- through RTGS dated 11.08.2025 and further Rs.7,65,000/- has been decided to be given at the time of second motion of divorce petition. It is further stated that the applicants have complied with the terms and conditions of the settlement and parties have settled to decide the criminal case in terms of the compromise and the opposite party no.2 shall not prosecute further against the applicants in any case. It is also stated therein that the present criminal case is pending between the parties and other disputes have been already resolved, therefore, this Court may be pleased to allow this application and quash the criminal case against the applicants in terms of the settlement and the case may be compounded. 12. A query has been made to the respondent no.2- Suman Kandari who is appearing through video conferencing and she confirms the averments made in the Compounding Application and she reiterates the same and states that the matter has been settled between the parties and she does not want to pursue the matter any further. 13. Mr. Vipul Painuly, learned AGA for the State raises serious objection for allowing the compounding application as the offences are non-compoundable. 14. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2012 (10) SCC 303, Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh, (2013) 11 SCC 497, B.S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Nikhil Merchant vs. CBI, (2008) 9 SCC 677, has permitted the compounding of non-compoundable offence and has held that in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Section 582 B.N.S.S.), 3 UKHC010180262025 2026:UHC:5573 compounding can be done in non-compoundable offences. 15. He further submits that since the matter relates to matrimonial disputes and parties have already settled their disputes amicably, hence, the compounding application deserved to be allowed. 16. Since the applicant no.1 and the respondent no.2 have already resolved their matrimonial disputes by virtue of the petition of mutual divorce, hence nothing survives and it will be futile exercise to let the matter go for trial. 17. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the present Compounding Application (IA No.03 of 2026) is accordingly allowed. The offences are permitted to be compounded. 18. As a consequence thereof, the Cognizance and Summoning Order dated 15.01.2025 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.2715 of 2015, ‘State vs. Manvendra Singh and Others” pertaining to FIR No.0033 of 2024 under Sections 323, 498A, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, at police station Rajpur, District Dehradun pending in the court of learned 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun are hereby quashed. 19. The Criminal Misc. Application No.2039 of 2025 is, accordingly, disposed of. 20. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly. (Siddhartha Sah, J.) 08.07.2026 JKJ/ 4