COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

Office Notes,

reports, orders or proceedings

SL. Dat or directions

No. e and Registrar’s

order with

Signatures 2025:UHC:8378

IA No.4 of 2025 (Compounding Application)

With

C482 No.143 of 2024

Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J.

Mr. Vijay Bhatt, Ms. Roshni Misra, learned counsels for the

Applicants.

2. Mr. G.C. Joshi, learned AGA for the State of Uttarakhand/1.

3. Mr. Abhishek Joshi, learned counsel for the private Respondent

No.2.

4. In the present Application filed under Section 482 of CrPC, the Applicants have put a challenge to the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.310 of 2024, for the offences punishable under Sections 376 of IPC and under Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate II^nd Haldwani, District Nainital. 5. The compounding application has been filed with a prayer that the parties have settled their dispute amongst themselves, and they wish to part peacefully, and thereby the parties were called in person before this Court, who are present before this Court and duly identified by their respective counsel. In the compounding application, the Applicants and the Respondent No.2 have put in their signatures which have been duly endorsed by the learned counsel for the Applicants Mr. Vijay Bhatt, and for the private Respondent No.2 Sri Abhishek Joshi, and Ms. Reema Rana. The said application is supported with an

affidavit.

6. As per the FIR filed by the Respondent No.2 Lalita @ Manisha against the Applicants resulted in a criminal trial under Sections 376 of IPC and under Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act. On interacting with the parties especially the Respondent No.2 and the Applicant No.1, the Respondent No.2 makes a statement regarding the compounding application that now it is over and she wishes to withdraw her complaint so made against the Applicants, and she does not want to prosecute them with the criminal proceedings pending before the learned Trial Court. Applicant No.1 makes a statement that they were

(Applicant No.1 and the Respondent No.2) were in live-in-relationship, but somehow the compatibility between amongst them did not match and the relations could not proceed further in the positive manner and now they wish to part positively on their own ways.

7. On particular question raised by this Court to the Respondent No.2 Lalita @ Manisha, as to why she had implicated the Applicant No.2 – Deepa Joshi. Her reply was that she/Applicant No.2 was the reason that Applicant No.1 and the Respondent No.2 could not get married as she did not accorded the permission.

8. Learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the compounding application.

9. After interacting with the parties, this Court is satisfied for allowing the compounding application, the compounding application is allowed.

10. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

11. In view of the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 as well as in Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 115 of 2012 (Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh) decided on 06.12.2012, criminal proceedings can be quashed by this Court, if this Court is satisfied that matter has been settled between the parties amicably and parties are interested to restore peace and harmony between them.

12. In view of the above, the compounding application is allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.310 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 376 of IPC and under Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate II^nd Haldwani, District Nainital, are hereby quashed.

13. The Criminal Miscellaneous Application, filed under 482 of the CrPC is disposed of accordingly.

(Ashish Naithani, J.)

19.09.2025 Nitesh/