Himachal Pradesh High Court
Dhruv Sharma & Ors vs State Of H.P. & Another on 9 May, 2023
Bench: Satyen Vaidya
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
Cr.MMO No. 247 of 2023.
Decided on : 9th May, 2023.
.
Dhruv Sharma & Ors. ...Petitioners.
Versus
State of H.P. & Another ....Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioners: Mr. Vinod Kumar Suman,
Advocate.
For Respondent No.1: Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional
Advocate General.
For Respondent No.2: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate.
Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral).
By way of this petition, a prayer has been made to
quash FIR No. 61 of 2022, dated 18.07.2022, registered at
Police Station Chhota Shimla, under Sections 147, 149, 323
and 427 of the IPC along with all consequential criminal
proceedings arising therefrom on the ground that the parties
have compromised the matter.
2. It is averred in the petition that the FIR in question
was registered under some misunderstanding. Later the
parties have compromised the matter with the intervention of
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
...2...
elders in the family and common friends. Terms of the
.
compromise have been recorded in writing vide Annexure P-2.
The petitioners as well as respondent No.2 have undertaken
to abide by terms of compromise Annexure P-2.
3. All the petitioners as also respondent No.2 were
present in the Court today. Statement of respondent No.2
was recorded on oath. Similarly, joint statement of the
petitioners was also recorded on oath. Petitioners and
respondent No.2 have verified the contents of the
compromise deed Annexure P-2 and have stated that the
matter stands compromised between them for all intents and
purposes with the intervention of elders in the family and
common friends. They have also stated that they intend to
live in peace with each other and for such reason compromise
has been arrived at.
4. I have gone through the terms of the compromise.
The same are lawful and hence there is no legal impediment
in allowing the prayer of the petitioners.
5. It is now well settled that in exercise of jurisdiction
under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., this Court can quash the FIR
...3...
and criminal proceedings involving non compoundable
.
offences provided that the offences do not fall in the category
of heinous and serious crimes.
6. In the given facts of the case, none of offences can
be said to be falling under above noted categories. The
dispute is in nature of private dispute between the parties.
Both the sides i.e. the accused and the complainant have
come forward with the compromise deed, Annexure P-2 which
records that the parties have settled their pending dispute
and have agreed to live in peace in future.
7. The prime object of every civilized society is to
secure the peace for its subjects. In case the prayer made in
the petition is allowed it will also further the above noted
object. It can also be seen that by allowing the prayer of the
petitioners, the interest of society as a whole will not be
prejudiced or affected in any manner.
8. In view of the above, the present petition is
allowed and FIR No. 61 of 2022, dated 18.07.2022, registered
at Police Station Chhota Shimla, under Sections 147, 149, 323
...4...
and 427 of the IPC along with all consequential criminal
.
proceedings arising therefrom are ordered to be quashed.
9. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Satyen Vaidya)
Judge
9th May, 2023.
(jai)
