St at e v. Jai Deep Ram j i Tukdiya and ot hers

of Mr. Am it Kapri, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 t o 5.

4. The present Crim inal Misc. Applicat ion under Sect ion 528 of t he Bharat iya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhit a, 2023, has been filed by t he Applicant- Rahul Kum ar Upadhyay against t he Respondent s, part icular, Respondent No. 2 - Gagendra Singh Soun S/ o Lat e Ram Singh, wit h t he prayer t o quash t he charge- sheet No. 107 of 2024 dat ed 06.12.2024, under Sect ions 120B, 323, 344, 346, 347, 367, 374, 386, 419, 420, and 506 I PC, t he sum m oning order dat ed 12.12.2024, passed by t he learned Chief Judicial Magist rat e, Cham pawat in Crim inal Case No. 2248 of 2024, “ St at e vs. Jai Deep Ram j i Tukdiya and ot hers” under t he j urisdict ion of Police St at ion Banbasa, Dist rict Cham pawat , along wit h t he ent ire proceedings of Crim inal Case No. 104 of 2025, “ St at e vs. Rahul Kum ar”, pending before t he learned Chief Judicial Magist rat e, Cham pawat .

5. Along wit h t he C- 528 Applicat ion, a Com pounding Applicat ion ( I A No. 01 of 2025, Paper No. 27) has also been filed, which is support ed by affidavit s. The said Com pounding Applicat ion annexed wit h t he signat ures of t he part ies. The said Applicat ion is endorsed by t he learned counsels for t he part ies respect ively — Mr. Deep Prakash Bhat t and Mr. Mani Kum ar, learned counsels t he Applicant , and Mr. Am it Kapri, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 t o 5. Bot h t he part ies, t he Applicant and Respondent Nos. 2 t o 5, m ake a subm ission t hat t hey have arrived at a com prom ise and wish t o proceed wit h t he Com pounding Applicat ion, and request t hat t he m at t er be disposed of on t hat basis.

6. The part ies are present in- person and are being ident ified by t heir respect ive counsels.

7. Upon int eract ing wit h t he part ies, it appears t hat t he present Crim inal Proceedings arise from an incident involving a m issing report filed by Respondent No. 2 regarding his m issing son, list ed as Respondent No. 3 - Lalit Singh Soun, who st at ed t hat he had sought help from a friend regarding em ploym ent abroad, whereby a person nam ed Jai Deep abduct ed and lured him t o Thailand for som e kind of j ob. He was t hen illegally t ransferred t o Myanm ar t o engage in cert ain shady ( illegal) act iv it ies relat ed t o crypt ocurrency, where his j ob was t o search for client s and rope t hem int o illegal act iv it y.

8. Respondent No. 2 furt her st at es t hat , som ehow, wit h t he help of t he I ndian Em bassy in Myanm ar, t hey were rescued and m anaged t o ret urn t o I ndia. Lalit ’s st ory is support ed and assert ed by Respondent No. 4 and Respondent No. 5. They also st at e t hat t hey were persuaded and lured wit h t he prom ise of a j ob in Thailand but were ult im at ely sm uggled int o illegal work. The person responsible for get t ing t hem int o t his m ess is a person known as Jaideep, who is facing t rial in t he present m at t er.

9. Now, besides Lalit Singh Soun, Kam lesh Singh, and Vikas Singh, a fourt h person com es int o t he pict ure, i.e., Rahul, who was work ing in Dubai and was a friend of t he above t rio — Lalit Singh Soun, Kam lesh Singh, and Vikash Singh. They init ially sought help from Rahul regarding em ploym ent abroad. He was working in Dubai and int roduced t hem t o t he person Jaideep.

10. Since t he st ory broke out , t here was a lookout not ice for t he Applicant - Rahul Kum ar Upadhyay. He was arrest ed at I ndira Gandhi I nt ernat ional Airport , Delhi, while ret urning from Dubai.

11. Now, t he Applicant and Respondent Nos. 2 t o 5 wish t o set t le t he m at t er.

12. The learned St at e Counsel st rongly obj ect s t o t he said Com pounding Applicat ion, cont ending t hat t he m at t er is non- com poundable and t hat t he com pounding should be rej ect ed.

13. Aft er int eract ing wit h t he Applicant and Respondent Nos. 2 t o 5, t his Court is of t he opinion t hat t hey deserve a second lease of life and an opport unit y t o st art afresh.

14. Considering t he overall fact s and circum st ances of t he case, t his Court is of t he view t hat t he ends of j ust ice would be m et by quashing t he charge- sheet No. 107 of 2024 dat ed 16.12.2024, under Sect ions 120B, 323, 344, 346, 347, 367, 374, 386, 419, 420 506 I PC, t he sum m oning dat ed

12.12.2024, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magist rat e, Cham pawat in Crim inal Case No. 2248 of 2024, “ St at e vs. Jai Deep Ram j i Tukdiya and Ot hers” regist ered at Banbasa, Dist rict Cham pawat along wit h t he ent ire proceedings of Crim inal Case No. 104 of 2025, “ St at e vs. Rahul kum ar, pending before t he learned Chief Judicial Magist rat e, Cham pawat .

15. Accordingly, t he Com pounding Applicat ion allowed. The ent ire proceedings of charge- sheet No. 107 of 2024 dat ed 16.12.2024, under Sect ions 120B, 323, 344, 346, 347, 367, 374, 386, 419, 420 and 506 I PC, t he sum m oning order dat ed 12.12.2024, passed learned Chief Judicial Magist rat e, Cham pawat in Crim inal Case No. 2248 of 2024, “ St at e vs. Jai Deep Ram j i Tukdiya and Ot hers” regist ered at Banbasa, Dist rict Cham pawat along wit h t he ent ire proceedings of Crim inal Case No. 104 of 2025, “ St at e vs. Rahul kum ar, pending before t he learned Chief Judicial Magist rat e, Cham pawat , are hereby quashed qua t he present Applicant .

16. The Crim inal Miscellaneous Applicat ion under Sect ion 528 of t he Bharat iya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhit a, 2023, is accordingly disposed of. ( A sh i sh N a i t h a n i , J.) 1 4 .0 8 .2 0 2 5 Shiksha 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