Aakash vs State Of H.P.& Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 17091 HP

                               1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
                          Cr. MMO No. 1108 of 2023

                                Decided on : 30.10.2023




                                                           .
      Aakash                                       ...Petitioner





                                Versus





      State of H.P.& others              ...Respondents
      ____________________________________________________

      Coram




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

      For the Petitioner :      Ms. Pooja Verma, Advocate

                                vice Mr. Ankit Dhiman,
                                Advocate.

      For the Respondents : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Addl.


                            A.G., for respondents No.1 &
                            2-State.

                                Ms.    Abhilasha   Kaundal,




                                Advocate, vice Mr. Hemant
                                Kumar Thakur, Advocate,





                                for respondent No. 3.

      Virender Singh, Judge (oral)

The petitioner has filed the present

petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Cr. P.C.)

seeking quashing of FIR No. 70 of 2019, dated

12.7.2019, under Sections 325, 323 and 201 of the

Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC')

registered with Police Station, Nahan, District Sirmour,

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

.

pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate

First Class, Nahan (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial

Court), in view of the compromise, having been effected,

between the parties.

2. The case, as set up by the petitioner, in the

petition, is that FIR in question was registered with

Police Station, Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P., at the

instance of respondent No. 3.

3. After registration of the FIR, on statement of

respondent No. 3, criminal machinery swung into

motion. After completion of the investigation, report

under Section 173(2) of Cr. P.C. was submitted in the

learned trial Court.

4. Now, the petitioner is before this Court, with a

prayer to quash the FIR in question, as well as, the

resultant proceedings thereto, pending before the

learned trial Court, on the basis of compromise, which

has taken place between the parties. The compromise

deed is annexed with the petition, as Annexure P-2.

5. On all these submissions, a prayer to allow the

.

present petition, by quashing the FIR in question, as

well as, resultant proceedings thereto, has been made.

6. When put to notice, respondents-State has filed

the status report, disclosing therein the manner, in

which, the FIR in question has been registered and

Police, after investigating the matter, submitted the

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

pending in the learned trial Court.

7. Respondent No. 3, who at one point of time, had

lodged the FIR against her son, for the commission of

offences, punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 201

IPC, when appeared before this Court, has exonerated

the petitioner from the aforesaid offences, on the basis

of compromise, entered into between the parties. She

has categorically stated that she has no objection, in

case, the petition is allowed and the FIR in question, as

well as, resultant proceedings thereto, are quashed.

8. Similar type of statement has been made by the

petitioner.

9. Heard.

.

10. The complainant, in this case, is none other

than the mother of petitioner, who, compelled by the

circumstances, was forced to lodge the FIR against her

son. Now, in order to live peacefully and to maintain

their cordial relations, they have compromised the

matter, as per compromise deed, Annexure P-2.

11. Acceptance of the compromise would encourage

the parties to live peacefully in the society. The primary

purpose of law is to maintain peace and harmony in the

society and when, the parties to the lis, i.e. petitioner

and respondent No. 3 have compromised the matter,

then, the continuation of the criminal proceedings,

arising out of the FIR in question, lodged by respondent

No. 3, would certainly amount to abuse of the process

of law.

12. Acceptance of the compromise will also save the

precious judicial time of the learned trial Court, as the

learned trial Court will be in a position to devote such

time, for deciding some other serious disputes, pending

before it.

13. Considering all these facts, the present petition

.

is allowed and FIR No. 70 of 2019, dated 12.7.2019,

under Sections 325, 323 and 201 of the IPC and the

proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the

learned trial Court, are quashed.

14. The statements, so recorded, before this Court,

as well as, compromise Annexure P-2, shall form part of

the judgment.

15. The present petition is allowed in the aforesaid

terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also

stands disposed of.

(Virender Singh) Judge

October 30, 2023 Kalpana