JUDGMENT & ORDER : ANJAN MONI KALITA, J. Heard Mr. M. Bagra, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D. Loyi, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh. 2. As agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the matter has been taken up for disposal at the motion stage itself. 3. The facts of the case are that on 25.06.2021, an FIR was lodged by one Shri Kipa Kaha (petitioner No.1 herein), President of Arunachal Taekwondo Association (ATA), alleging that some persons had misused fake Taekwondo certificates to avail government jobs under meritorious sports quota of the Government of India. It was alleged that the Government of India had notified 63 (sixty three) sports disciplines vide Reference No.F.No.14034/1/2013-ESTT dated 01.09.2020, before the Officer-in-Charge, Special Investigation Team (SIT), PHQ, Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh. 4. After receipt of the said FIR, a case has been registered and the investigation was conducted, and thereafter, a charge-sheet was filed under Sections 201 /420/468/471 of the IPC on 17.03.2022, before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, against 19(nineteen) alleged accused persons including the accused petitioner No.2. As per the aforesaid charge-sheet, the accused petitioner No.2 applied for the post of TGT (History) under meritorious sports quota on the strength of several certificates, as detailed in the charge- sheet, obtained from the General Secretary of the Arunachal Taekwondo Association for participation in the said event. Based on the qualification so submitted by the petitioner No.2, she was selected for the post of TGT (History). However, after receipt of a letter from Shri Tadar Appa, Director,Sports, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh and Shri Likha Robin, General Secretary of Arunachal Taekwondo Association, it was found that the certificate th of Gold medal in 8 National Senior Poomsae Men & Women Taekwondo Championship (2016-17), Vishakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh and the certificate th of Silver medal in 9 National Senior Poomsae Taekwondo Championship 2017, Haridwar, Uttarakhand of the accused petitioner were not genuine. It was further alleged that in absence of any genuine certificates, the accused petitioner No.2 could not have obtained Form No.-II certificate for the same event, which revealed that her Form No.-II certificate was also fake. In fact, the accused petitioner No.2 confessed before the police to having used fake documents along with fake Form No.-II knowingly. It was further alleged that in absence of any genuine certificates, the accused petitioner No.2 could not have obtained Form No.-II certificate for the same event, which revealed that her Form No.-II certificate was also fake. In fact, the accused petitioner No.2 confessed before the police to having used fake documents along with fake Form No.-II knowingly. It was further alleged that she stated before the police that she had obtained the fake certificates from the accused Shri Tara Tagin. In view of the aforesaid charge-sheet, the Investigating Officer being prima facie satisfied, filed the charge-sheet under Sections 420 /468/471/34 IPC, against the accused petitioner. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that accordingly, a case has been registered before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Yupia, District Papum Pare, Arunachal Pradesh and the matter is awaiting consideration of charges. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the accused petitioner No.2 and the informant, Shri Kipa Kaha (petitioner No.1), President of Arunachal Taekwondo Association, have come to an agreement and accordingly, they have executed a Deed of Mutual Settlement Agreement dated 03.08.2025. He submits that the parties have agreed to compromise and settle the proceedings of the criminal case, i.e., CBPS Case No.07/2021, corresponding to GR. No.576/2021, pending before the Court of learned JMFC, Yupia. In view of the aforesaid mutual agreement, the learned counsel submits and prays before this Court that this Court in exercise of its power conferred under Section 528 of BNSS , 2023, may quash the proceedings of CBPS Case No.07/2021. 6. It is seen that this petition has been jointly filed by the aforesaid informant, namely, Shri Kipa Kaha and the accused petitioner. As far as the charges are concerned, it is seen that the charges have been framed against the accused petitioner under Sections 420 /468/471/34 of the IPC. It is seen that none of the sections are compoundable under the provisions of Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has cited the case of Nikhil Merchant Vs. CBI &Anr., reported in (2008) 9 SCC 677 . He relied on paragraphs No.24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 of the aforesaid judgment. 8. A cumulative reading of the aforesaid paragraphs reveals that the same is distinguishable from the instant case. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has cited the case of Nikhil Merchant Vs. CBI &Anr., reported in (2008) 9 SCC 677 . He relied on paragraphs No.24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 of the aforesaid judgment. 8. A cumulative reading of the aforesaid paragraphs reveals that the same is distinguishable from the instant case. In the aforesaid case cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the issue was between a company and a bank, wherein the company by some misrepresentation, had availed some additional loan. However, upon filing of the complaint, the company readily repaid the additional amount and settled the dispute between them, and in those factual circumstances, the Hon’ble Apex Court allowed the mutual settlement and quashed the proceedings against the company. However, in the instant case, the facts are totally different as the accused petitioner with the help of certain fake certificates got herself selected for a government job. 9. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. I have also perused the materials brought on record. 10. After considering all the materials in its entirety, this Court is of the opinion that the instant case does not merit any interference at this stage. 11. Accordingly, the instant criminal petition stands dismissed and disposed of.