SL. N o . Of f i ce s v. Girish Pandey (FIR No.49 of 2024) for the offence punishable under Sections

Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, learned counsel for By means of the Applicant. 2. Mr. Girish Chandra Joshi, learned AGA for the State. 3. this C528 application, Applicant has sought quashing of the charge sheet no.79 of 2024 dated 07.11.2024, impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 01.03.2025 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.64 of 2025 State vs. Girish Pandey (FIR No.49 of 2024) for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 354-A, 452 and 504 of IPC registered at P.S. Tanakpur, District Champawat pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Tanakpur, District Champawat. 4. As per office report dated 30.07.2025 Respondent no.2 had been served with the notices personally and today Respondent no.2 is represented by Mr. B.S. Bhandari, learned counsel. 5. has filed his Vakalatnama today in the Court. 6. Learned counsel for the Applicant makes a statement that the parties have come into the terms of compromise and the statement has been asserted by learned counsel for the other parties that a compromise deed is executed on behalf of the parties.

Copy of the same is Annexed as Paper no.17 and 18 to the present Application. 7. Mr. Girish Pandey, son of Late Sri Puran Chandra Pandey and Respondent no.2-Smt. Learned counsel for the Respondent no.2 Meena Dhami wife of Late Sri Harish Dhami are present in the Court. They are duly identified by their respective counsel. This Court has interaction with the parties 8. and on interaction both the parties i.e. Applicant and Respondent no.2 submit that they are agreed that the matter may be compounded to the tune of Annexure No.2 Paper No.17 and 18 whereby Respondent no.2-Smt. Meena Dhami wife of Late Sri Harish Dhami makes a statement before this Court that she is willing to forego the past acts of the Applicant on the condition that Applicant may not bother her in near future. 9. To this, the Applicant-Girish Pandey, who works in the Forest Department, asserts the fact stated by Respondent no.2 and submits that he is also willing to settle this matter between both of them.

10. Learned State Counsel has opposed the present compromise deed and submits that the offence punishable under Section 452 and 354- A of IPC are not compoundable. 11. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. In view of the principle of law laid down 12. by Ho’ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303, 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 interest to restore peace and harmony between them. 13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and compromise deed Annexure 17 and 18 to the present Application is allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.64 of 2025 State vs. Girish Pandey (FIR No.49 of 2024) for in view of the above, the offence punishable under Sections 323, 354- A, 452 and 504 of IPC pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Tanakpur, District Champawat are hereby quashed.