Allowed¶13

Mohd Aklim v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC3 Jun 2026C528/1252/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: compounding of non-compoundable offences with the Court's permission; quashing of FIR, charge-sheet, summoning/cognizance order and entire criminal proceedings on the basis of the parties' compromise; Dowry Prohibition Act Section 3/4; Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 Section 3/4; IPC Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506; marital separation and 'Talak' per Muslim law; affidavits of compromise; B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675 (followed); Judicial Magistrate, Vikasnagar, District Dehradun; Alok Mahra, J.; decision date 03.06.2026; C528 No. 1252 of 2026; criminal misc. application allowed and disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Compounding of the offences between the parties permitted; chargesheet, summoning/cognizance order, FIR and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 943 of 2025 quashed qua the applicant.

No	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
			C528 No. 1252 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Ms. Poonam Rauthan, learned counsel for the complainant/respondent no. 2. 4. The present criminal misc. application is filed with a prayer to set-aside the chargesheet, summoning/cognizance order as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 943 of 2025, State Vs. Aklim, under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 3/4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 and Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Vikasnagar, District Dehradun, on the basis of compromise between the parties. 5. Now, Compounding Application is filed in the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the offences between the parties. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise. 7. Parties are present before this Court and are duly identified by their respective counsels. Parties have also filed their respective affidavits stating the facts of compromise between them. 8. The Court interacted with the parties. Upon interaction, respondent no. 2 has submitted that now applicant and respondent no. 2 have decided to live separately and as per the Muslim law, they have proceeded for_Talak_. It is further submitted that she has amicably settled her dispute with the applicant and she does not want to pursue with

Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
directions and
Registrar’s order
with Signatures

COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS

C528 No. 1252 of 2026
Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel for the
applicant.
2.
Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3.
Ms. Poonam Rauthan, learned counsel for
the complainant/respondent no. 2.
4.
The present criminal misc. application is
filed with a prayer to set-aside the chargesheet,
summoning/cognizance order as well as the entire
proceedings of Criminal Case No. 943 of 2025,
State Vs. Aklim, under Section 3/4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act and Section 3/4 of Muslim Women
(Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 and
Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC, pending
in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate,
Vikasnagar, District Dehradun, on the basis of
compromise between the parties.
5.
Now, Compounding Application is filed in
the matter wherein it is prayed to compound the
offences between the parties.
6.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits
that the parties have amicably settled their
dispute and have entered into a compromise.
7.
Parties are present before this Court and
are duly identified by their respective counsels.
Parties have also filed their respective affidavits
stating the facts of compromise between them.
8.
The Court interacted with the parties. Upon
interaction, respondent no. 2 has submitted that
now applicant and respondent no. 2 have decided
to live separately and as per the Muslim law, they
have proceeded for_Talak_. It is further submitted
that she has amicably settled her dispute with the
applicant and she does not want to pursue with

the criminal proceedings against the applicant. 9. At this stage, learned State Counsel raised a
preliminary objection to the effect that the
offences sought to be compounded are non- compoundable.
10. However, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana
reported in (2003) 4 S.C.C., Page 675, has permitted compounding of non-compoundable offences with the permission of Court.
11. Furthermore, Hon’ble Supreme Court, in a catena of its judgments, has observed that in cases where because of the compromise arrived at between the parties, possibility of conviction is remote and bleak, the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings as continuation of the same would cause great prejudice and injustice to the accused.
12. Following the aforesaid ratio, the present compounding application is allowed. The offences between the parties are permitted to be compounded. As a result, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 943 of 2025, State Vs. Aklim, under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 3/4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 and Sections 498- A, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Vikasnagar, District Dehradun, are hereby quashed qua the applicant. FIR and charge-sheet filed pursuant thereto stand quashed.
13. Accordingly, the present criminal misc. application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Alok Mahra J.) 03.06.2026 Ujjwal

the criminal proceedings against the applicant.
9.
At this stage, learned State Counsel raised a

preliminary objection to the effect that the

offences sought to be compounded are non-
compoundable.

10. However, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana

reported in (2003) 4 S.C.C., Page 675, has
permitted compounding of non-compoundable
offences with the permission of Court.

11. Furthermore, Hon’ble Supreme Court, in a
catena of its judgments, has observed that in
cases where because of the compromise arrived
at between the parties, possibility of conviction is
remote and bleak, the High Court may quash the
criminal proceedings as continuation of the same
would cause great prejudice and injustice to the
accused.

12. Following the aforesaid ratio, the present
compounding application is allowed. The offences
between
the
parties
are
permitted
to
be
compounded. As a result, the entire proceedings
of Criminal Case No. 943 of 2025, State Vs.
Aklim, under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act
and Section 3/4 of Muslim Women (Protection of
Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 and Sections 498-
A, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC, pending in the court
of learned Judicial Magistrate, Vikasnagar, District
Dehradun, are hereby quashed qua the applicant.
FIR and charge-sheet filed pursuant thereto stand
quashed.

13. Accordingly, the present criminal misc.
application stands disposed of in the aforesaid
terms.
(Alok Mahra J.)
03.06.2026
Ujjwal

Mohd Aklim v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Aklim v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nitin Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Tauheed Beg and Ors. Vs State of Uttarakhand

Himanshu Joshi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Shashi Kumar Singh and Others Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohd Rizwan Alias Aman Vs State of Uttarakhand

Narendra Singh Mehra Vs State of Uttarakhand