Vijay Kumar & Another vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 17071 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr.MMO No.955 of 2023

.

Decided on : 30.10.2023

Vijay Kumar & Another ...Petitioners

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh & Another ...Respondents

Coram

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1

For the petitioners : Ms. Pooja Verma, Advocate

vice Mr. Rajul Chauhan,

Advocate.

    For the respondents :                        Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional
                                                 Advocate    General, for
                                                 respondent No.1.



                                                 Ms. Abhilasha Kaundal,
                                                 Advocate vice Mr. Ajay Singh
                                                 Kashyap, Advocate,     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 'CrPC'), for quashing of FIR No.140 of 2022,

dated 26th September, 2022, registered with Police Station,

Sadar Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., under Sections 323,

341, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

(hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC'), as well as, the

subsequent proceedings thereto, which are stated to be

.

pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Shimla (hereinafter

referred to as the 'trial Court').

2. The relief of quashing has been sought on the

basis of the compromise effected between the parties.

3. According to the petitioners, on the statement

of respondent No.2, the FIR, in question, has been

registered against them.

4. After registration of the FIR, the police has

conducted the investigation and submitted the report

under Section 173(2) Cr.PC, which is now pending

adjudication before the learned trial Court.

5. According to the petitioners, they, as well as,

respondent No.2, are the students and in order to live

peacefully in the society and with the intervention of the

respectables of the society, the matter has been

compromised with respondent No.2.

6. The terms and conditions of the compromise

have been reduced into writing, which are annexed with

.

the petition, as Annexure P­2.

7. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has

been made that the FIR, as well as, proceedings, resultant

thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, may kindly

be quashed and set aside, by allowing the petition.

8. When put to notice, respondent No.1­State has

filed the status report, mentioning therein the

circumstances, in which the FIR, in question, has been

registered, at the instance of respondent No.2, as well as,

the investigation, which has been conducted, by the police,

in this case.

9. Respondent No.2, (complainant­injured), who,

at one point of time, has levelled the allegations against the

petitioners, has now compromised the matter with the

petitioners.

10. Respondent No.2, today, appeared, before this

Court and exonerated both the petitioners by stating that

the matter has now been compromised between them.

According to him, in order to maintain their cordial

relations and with the intervention of the respectables of

the society, he has compromised the matter with the

.

petitioners. He, in unequivocal terms, has deposed that he

has no objection, in case, the petition is allowed, as prayed

for.

11. Similar type of statement has been made by the

petitioners, on oath.

12. Petitioners, as well as, respondent No.2, are

admittedly, the students. All the three have disclosed their

age as 20 years. All the three are young men and are at

the thresh­hold of their career, however, compelled by the

circumstances, respondent No.2, had lodged the FIR

against the petitioners. In the said FIR, police has

conducted the investigation and submitted the report

under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., before the learned trial

Court.

13. Now, good sense has prevailed upon them and

they have compromised the matter, vide compromise deed,

Annexure P­2. The said compromise, seems to be

voluntary, as respondent No.2, has stated that there is no

pressure or coercion upon him to enter into the

compromise.

.

14. Once, the person, who has put the criminal

machinery into motion has compromised the matter with

the petitioners, then, the ultimate success of the case of

the prosecution against the petitioners are not so bright.

15. Even otherwise, in view of the compromise

between the r parties, permitting the proceedings to

continue, would be nothing, but, abuse of the process of

law. Even otherwise, the acceptance of the compromise, by

this Court, will also reduce the bitterness between the

petitioners and respondent No.2.

16. Considering all these facts, the petition is

allowed and FIR No.140 of 2022, dated 26th September,

2022, registered under Sections 323, 341, 506 read with

Section 34 IPC, against the petitioners, with Police Station

Sadar Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., as well as, the

proceedings resultant thereto, which are stated to be

pending before the learned trial Court, are ordered to be

quashed.

17. The compromise deed, Annexure P­2, and the

statements of the parties, recorded today, in the Court,

.

shall form part of the judgment.

18. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any,

shall also stand disposed of accordingly.

( Virender Singh ) Judge October 30, 2023(ps)