Amant Preet And Others vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 308 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                 CRMMO No. 322 of 2020
                                                 Decided on: 06.01.2021




                                                                     .

     Amant Preet and others                                      ....Petitioners.

                  Versus





     State of Himachal Pradesh and another                       ...Respondents.
     Coram
     The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
     Whether approved for reporting?1 No





     For the petitioners         :       Mr. Bhairav Gupta, Advocate.

     For the respondents         :       M/s Somesh Raj, Dinesh Thakur
                                         and Sanjeev Sood, Additional
                  r                      Advocate Generals with Ms.
                                         Divya Sood, Deputy Advocate

                                         General for respondent No. 1

                                 :       Mr. Anil Thakur, Advocate for
                                         respondent No. 2.


     Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners have prayed

for quashing of FIR No. 188 of 2019, dated 20.07.2019,

registered under Sections 498-A, 506, 120-B and 354 of the

Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Sadar Mandi, District

Mandi, H.P. as well as consequential criminal proceedings, if

any pending before the learned Trial Court.

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners as

well as learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 and learned

.

Additional Advocate General.

3. Respondent No. 2, Ms. Inderpreet, who is present

in person in the Court, has been duly identified by her

Counsel Mr. Anil Thakur, Advocate. Her statement has also

been independently recorded in the Court, wherein she has

stated that she has entered into a compromise with the

petitioners/accused and she is not interested in pursuing the

matter which led to registration of FIR No. 188 of 2019, dated

20.07.2019, registered under Sections 498-A, 506, 120-B and

354 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Sadar Mandi,

District Mandi, H.P. as well as consequential criminal

proceedings, pending before learned Trial Court. A copy of

compromise deed so arrived at between the parties is

appended with the petition as annexure P-2 and execution of

the same as also the contents thereof have also been

acknowledged by respondent No. 2.

4. Learned Additional Advocate General has also very

fairly submitted that the respondent-State has no objection in

case petition is allowed and FIR in issue as well as

consequential criminal proceedings, if any, pending trial, are

quashed and set aside.

.

5. Accordingly, in view of above, this petition is

allowed and FIR No. 188 of 2019, dated 20.07.2019,

registered under Sections 498-A, 506, 120-B and 354 of the

Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Sadar Mandi, District

Mandi, H.P. as well as consequential criminal proceedings,

pending in the Trial Court, which have ensued from said FIR,

are quashed and set aside, taking into consideration the

compromise entered between the complainant i.e. respondent

No. 2 and accused i.e. present petitioners and statement to

this effect, made by respondent No. 2 in this Court. The

compromise deed Annexure P-2 as well as statement of the

complainant made today in the Court shall form part of the

judgment.

Petition is accordingly disposed of in above terms,

so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge January 06, 2021 (narender)