Pradeep Kumar Garg And Another … vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 8 April, 2025

Uttarakhand High Court

Pradeep Kumar Garg And Another … vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 8 April, 2025

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
        Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 1664 of 2022
                                08th April, 2025
Pradeep Kumar Garg and another                              ............Applicants
                                      Versus
State of Uttarakhand and another                         ............Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Pawan Mishra, Advocate for the applicants.
Mr. S.C. Dumka, A.G.A. for the State.
Mr. Ramji Srivastava and Mr. Vishesh Srivastava, Advocates for respondent no.2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

Present C482 application has been filed by the applicants
along with compounding application for quashing the impugned charge
sheet dated 22.12.2021 and cognizance order dated 27.04.2022, passed
by learned IIIrd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun and
proceedings of Criminal Case No.3015 of 2022, State Vs. Suresh Negi
and others, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC.

2. For the said purpose, a joint compounding application has
been moved by the parties, supported by their respective affidavits, in
which it has been narrated by both the parties that they have settled their
dispute and do not want to proceed with the instant criminal proceedings.

3. Parties are present before this Court, duly identified by their
respective Advocates. On interaction with both the parties, they stated
that they have settled all their disputes amicably and do not want to
prolong the matter any further.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has formally
objected to the compounding application in view of offences being non-
compoundable in the present case.

5. So far as compounding of non-compoundable offence is
concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with the consequence of a
compromise in this regard in the case of B.S. Joshi and others vs. State
of Haryana and another, reported in (2003)4 SCC 675 and has held as
below: –

1

“If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR
becomes necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the
exercise of power of quashing. It is, however, a different matter
depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether
to exercise or not such a power.”

6. Having considered the submission made by learned counsel
for the parties, this Court is convinced that once the parties have decided
to settle their dispute amicably, by a compromise saying that the
applicants shall co-operate with respondent no.2 in a civil litigation,
pending between respondent no.2 and Flawrence Rastogi and others in
Dehradun, there will be no fruitful purpose to ask the parties to face the
trial, in a case, which would ultimately result into acquittal as the said
exercise would be a futile exercise between the trial court, given the
compromise entered between the parties.

7. Accordingly, Compounding Application (IA No.3 of 2025)
is allowed. The offences between the parties are permitted to be
compounded. As a result, the impugned Charge Sheet dated 22.12.2021
and cognizance order dated 27.04.2022, passed by learned IIIrd
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun and entire proceedings
of Criminal Case No.3015 of 2022, State Vs. Suresh Negi and others,
under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC are hereby quashed.

8. It is also made clear, as an abundant precaution, by this
Court that in any case if the applicants failed to abide by terms and
conditions of the compromise between the parties, it shall be open to
respondent no.2 to make a recall application, to reopen case against the
applicants.

9. C482 application stands disposed-off, in the aforesaid
terms.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
08.04.2025
SK

2