Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs Jai Deep Ramji Tukdiya And on 14 August, 2025
2025:UHC:7219
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL.
proceedings or
No Date COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
directions and
.
Registrar's order
with Signatures
C-528 No. 658 of 2025
Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.
Mr. Mani Kumar, learned counsel for the
Applicant.
2. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A. for the State
of Uttarakhand.
3. Mr. Manoj Bhatt, learned counsel holding brief
of Mr. Amit Kapri, learned counsel for Respondent
Nos. 2 to 5.
4. The present Criminal Misc. Application under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the Applicant- Rahul
Kumar Upadhyay against the Respondents, in
particular, Respondent No. 2 – Gagendra Singh Soun
S/o Late Ram Singh, with the prayer to quash the
charge-sheet No. 107 of 2024 dated 06.12.2024,
under Sections 120B, 323, 344, 346, 347, 367, 374,
386, 419, 420, and 506 IPC, the summoning order
dated 12.12.2024, passed by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Champawat in Criminal Case No.
2248 of 2024, “State vs. Jai Deep Ramji Tukdiya and
others” under the jurisdiction of Police Station
Banbasa, District Champawat, along with the entire
proceedings of Criminal Case No. 104 of 2025, “State
vs. Rahul Kumar“, pending before the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Champawat.
5. Along with the C-528 Application, a
Compounding Application (IA No. 01 of 2025, Paper
No. 27) has also been filed, which is supported by
affidavits. The said Compounding Application is
annexed with the signatures of the parties. The said
2025:UHC:7219
Application is endorsed by the learned counsels for
the parties respectively — Mr. Deep Prakash Bhatt
and Mr. Mani Kumar, learned counsels for the
Applicant, and Mr. Amit Kapri, learned counsel for
Respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Both the parties, the
Applicant and Respondent Nos. 2 to 5, make a
submission that they have arrived at a compromise
and wish to proceed with the Compounding
Application, and request that the matter be disposed
of on that basis.
6. The parties are present in-person and are being
identified by their respective counsels.
7. Upon interacting with the parties, it appears
that the present Criminal Proceedings arise from an
incident involving a missing report filed by
Respondent No. 2 regarding his missing son, listed as
Respondent No. 3 – Lalit Singh Soun, who stated that
he had sought help from a friend regarding
employment abroad, whereby a person named Jai
Deep abducted and lured him to Thailand for some
kind of job. He was then illegally transferred to
Myanmar to engage in certain shady (illegal)
activities related to cryptocurrency, where his job was
to search for clients and rope them into illegal
activity.
8. Respondent No. 2 further states that, somehow,
with the help of the Indian Embassy in Myanmar, they
were rescued and managed to return to India. Lalit’s
story is supported and asserted by Respondent No. 4
and Respondent No. 5. They also state that they were
persuaded and lured with the promise of a job in
Thailand but were ultimately smuggled into illegal
work. The person responsible for getting them into
2025:UHC:7219
this mess is a person known as Jaideep, who is facing
trial in the present matter.
9. Now, besides Lalit Singh Soun, Kamlesh Singh,
and Vikas Singh, a fourth person comes into the
picture, i.e., Rahul, who was working in Dubai and
was a friend of the above trio — Lalit Singh Soun,
Kamlesh Singh, and Vikash Singh. They initially
sought help from Rahul regarding employment
abroad. He was working in Dubai and introduced
them to the person Jaideep.
10. Since the story broke out, there was a lookout
notice for the Applicant – Rahul Kumar Upadhyay. He
was arrested at Indira Gandhi International Airport,
Delhi, while returning from Dubai.
11. Now, the Applicant and Respondent Nos. 2 to 5
wish to settle the matter.
12. The learned State Counsel strongly objects to
the said Compounding Application, contending that
the matter is non-compoundable and that the
compounding should be rejected.
13. After interacting with the Applicant and
Respondent Nos. 2 to 5, this Court is of the opinion
that they deserve a second lease of life and an
opportunity to start afresh.
14. Considering the overall facts and circumstances
of the case, this Court is of the view that the ends of
justice would be met by quashing the charge-sheet
No. 107 of 2024 dated 16.12.2024, under Sections
120B, 323, 344, 346, 347, 367, 374, 386, 419, 420
and 506 IPC, the summoning order dated
12.12.2024, passed by learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Champawat in Criminal Case No. 2248 of
2024, “State vs. Jai Deep Ramji Tukdiya and Others“
2025:UHC:7219
registered at Banbasa, District Champawat along with
the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 104 of
2025, “State vs. Rahul kumar, pending before the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Champawat.
15. Accordingly, the Compounding Application is
allowed. The entire proceedings of charge-sheet No.
107 of 2024 dated 16.12.2024, under Sections 120B,
323, 344, 346, 347, 367, 374, 386, 419, 420 and
506 IPC, the summoning order dated 12.12.2024,
passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Champawat in Criminal Case No. 2248 of 2024,
“State vs. Jai Deep Ramji Tukdiya and Others“
registered at Banbasa, District Champawat along with
the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 104 of
2025, “State vs. Rahul kumar, pending before the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Champawat, are
hereby quashed qua the present Applicant.
16. The Criminal Miscellaneous Application filed
under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, is accordingly disposed of.
(Ashish Naithani, J.)
14.08.2025
Shiksha
Digitally signed by SHIKSHA BINJOLA
SHIKSHA BINJOLA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=3410ef86ae41ec9fbabcd5dba6b3a2c24b5aa08b09c12f21822fbd40bf639b1c,
postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=FD80A2D028949381C52796A542D7FF0A9BED00E67B5283D205F18FE29BDF
5DD9, cn=SHIKSHA BINJOLA
Date: 2025.08.14 19:05:23 +05’30’
2025:UHC:7219