Narender Singh And Others vs State Of H.P And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 18056 HP

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
                                                       Cr.MMO No. 1059 of 2023
                                                     Decided on: 17th November, 2023




                                                                                       .
        Narender Singh and others                                               .......Petitioners.





                                                     Versus





        State of H.P and another                                                 ...Respondents

        Coram





        The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
        Whether approved for reporting?1
        For the petitioners:                        Mr. Atul Thakur, Advocate vice
                                  r                 Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate.

        For the respondents:                        Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Addl. A.G.
                                                    and Ms. Leena Guleria, Dy. A.G
                                                    for respondent No.1.


                                                    Mr. Peeyush Agnihotri, Advocate
                                                    vice Ms. Aanchal Singh, for
                                                    respondent No.2.




        Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)

Petitioners have filed the present petition, under

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter

referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.'), with a prayer to quash FIR No. 19

of 2016, dated 09.04.2016, under Sections 341, 323, 147 and

427 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the

'IPC'), registered with Police Station, Shillai, District Sirmaur,

H.P., as well as, proceedings resultant thereto, pending in the

1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Shillai, District

Sirmaur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the 'learned trial Court)

.

vide Case No. 26 of 2018 titled as State of H.P vs. Narender

Singh and others, on the basis of compromise entered into

between the parties.

2. According to the petitioners, at the instance of

respondent No.2, the FIR in question has been registered and

thereafter the police has investigated the matter and filed the

report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, which is pending

adjudication before the learned trial Court.

3. It is the further case of the petitioners that the FIR in

question has been registered by respondent No.2 due to mis-

understandings and now with the intervention of the

respectables of the society, they have compromised the

matter. The terms and conditions of the compromise have

been reduced into writing and the same is placed on record

as Annexure P-2.

4. On the basis of compromise Annexure P-2, a prayer

has been made to allow the petition.

5. When put to notice, the respondent-State, has filed

the status report, disclosing therein, about the manner in

which, the FIR in question has been registered on the

statement of respondent No.2 and the manner, in which,

.

police has investigated the matter and submitted the report

under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, which is pending before the

learned trial Court.

6. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been

made to dismiss the petition.

7. Today, respondent No.2, has appeared before this

Court and stated, on oath, that due to some mis-

understandings, he has lodged the FIR and thereafter the

police has investigated the matter and filed the report under

Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, which is pending adjudication before

the learned trial Court.

8. According to him, during the pendency of the said

case before the learned trial Court, the said misunderstandings

have now been cleared and the matter has been

compromised vide compromise Annexure P-2. He has also

stated that he has no objection in case the petition is allowed.

9. Similar type of statement has also been made by

the petitioners.

10. Heard.

11. When the person who has lodged the FIR against

the petitioners has deposed, on oath, that the FIR was lodged

.

by him due to mis-understanding, then, chances of success of

the prosecution case, in the peculiar facts and circumstances

of the present case, are not so bright. Moreover, when the

parties have compromised the matter after clearing all the

mis-understandings of respondent No.2, then, the continuation

of the proceedings against the petitioners is nothing but, the

abuse of process of law.

12. The primary purpose of the law to maintain peace

and harmony in the society.

13. The petitioners and respondent No.2 are the

residents of the same area and when they have decided to

bury their inter se disputes in order to live peacefully, then, this

Court is of the view that compromise Annexure P-2 is the

genuine one. In addition to this, this Court is of the view that in

case the present petition is allowed, it will save the precious

judicial time of the learned trial Court, which, the learned trial

Court will be in a position to devote for the decision of some

other serious matters, pending before it.

14. Considering all these facts, the petition is allowed.

FIR No. 19 of 2016, dated 09.04.2016, under Sections 341, 323,

.

147 and 427 IPC, registered with Police Station, Shillai, District

Sirmaur, H.P., as well as, proceedings resultant thereto,

pending in the learned trial Court, vide Case No. 26 of 2018

titled as State of H.P vs. Narender Singh and others, are

ordered to be quashed.

15. The compromise deed, as well as, statement of the

parties, recorded today shall form part of this order.

16. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed

of.

    November 17, 2023                                   ( Virender Singh )
      (naveen)                                                Judge