Himachal Pradesh High Court
Aman Malhotra & Another vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Another on 13 November, 2024
Author: Virender Singh
Bench: Virender Singh
( 2024:HHC:11443
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MMO No.1098 of 2024
Decided on : 13.11.2024
Aman Malhotra & 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 petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Chauhan, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional
Advocate General for
respondents No.1.
Mr. Pawan Chauhan,
Advocate, for respondent No.2.
Virender Singh, Judge (oral).
Petitioners have filed the present petition, under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023 (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS'), for quashing of FIR
No.158/2024, dated 16.09.2024 (hereinafter referred to as
the FIR, in question), registered with Police Station, West,
District Shimla, H.P., under Sections 85, 115(2), 352,
351(2), 3(5) 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sahinta, 2023
(hereinafter referred to as 'the BNS').
Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
2. The relief of quashing has been sought, on the
basis of the compromises, which have taken place between
the petitioners and respondent No.2.
3. It is the case of the petitioners that marriage of
petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2, had taken place on
06.10.2021. Out of the said wedlock, they have been
blessed with a son namely Divyansh Malhotra. However,
due to some misunderstanding, respondent No.2, had
lodged FIR, in question.
4. It is the further case of the petitioners that now,
they have settled all the inter se disputes with respondent
No.2. The terms and conditions of the settlement have
been reduced into writing, vide Compromise Deed
Annexure P2.
5. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has
been made to quash the FIR, in question.
6. When put to notice, respondent No.1 has filed
the status report, mentioning therein the manner, in
which, the FIR, in question, has been registered, at the
instance of respondent No.2. It has also been mentioned
in the status report that the investigation in the present
case is complete and the final report has been prepared for
being presented in the competent Court of law.
7. The person, who, at one point of time, has put
the criminal machinery into motion, by lodging the FIR, in
question, by leveling allegations, as mentioned in it, now
has settled the matter with the petitioners vide compromise
deed Annexure P2.
8. Respondent No.2, while appearing before this
Court, has deposed that she was married with petitioner
No.1, in the year 2021. Thereafter, due to non
compatibility of the temperament, some misunderstandings
have been crept up between her and petitioner No.1, and
she had lodged FIR, in question, against the petitioners.
9. Respondent No.2, has further deposed that
after registration of the FIR, with the intervention of the
respectables of the society, efforts were made to settle the
dispute. According to her, those efforts were materialized
and all her misunderstandings have been cleared. Now,
she is happily residing with the petitioners in the
matrimonial home.
10. Respondent No.2, has also deposed that the
compromise has been effected out of her free will, consent
and without any pressure. She has also deposed that she
has no objection, in case, present petition is allowed as
prayed for.
11. Similar type of statement has also been made
by the petitioners, on oath.
12. Heard.
13. The marriage between petitioner No.1 and
respondent No.2, is stated to have taken place on
06.10.2021, however, compelled by the circumstances, it
seems that due to the matrimonial discord, respondent
No.2, had lodged the FIR, in question, against the
petitioners, in which, the police has conducted the
investigation.
14. Now, with the intervention of the respectables of
the society, petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2, have
compromised the matter, and respondent No.2, is now
residing happily with petitioner No.1, in the matrimonial
home. Not only this, as per her categorical stand, all the
disputes between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2,
have now been settled vide compromise Annexure P2.
15. The primary purpose of the law is to maintain
peace and harmony in the society. When, petitioner No.1
and respondent No.2, have now started residing together,
in the matrimonial home, after settling all the disputes,
then, their sincere efforts, which they had made, must be
recognized by the Court, by accepting the present petition,
as prayed for.
16. Even otherwise, if respondent No.2, is
compelled to pursue the criminal proceedings against the
petitioners, it would be nothing, but abuse of the process
of law and it would also adversely affect the matrimonial
life of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 as well as, their
minor son.
17. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the
view that in case, the present petition is allowed, it will not
only save the precious judicial time of the learned trial
Court, but, it will also save the valuable relations between
the parties i.e. petitioners and respondent No.2. The time,
which, the learned trial Court, would have devoted for the
decision of this case, may be devoted for deciding some
other serious matter.
18. Considering all these facts, the petition is
allowed and FIR No.158/2024, dated 16.09.2024
registered with Police Station, West, District Shimla, H.P.,
under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) 238 of the
BNS, is ordered to be quashed.
19. The compromise Annexure P2 and the
statements of the parties, recorded today, shall form part of
the judgment.
20. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any,
shall also stand disposed of accordingly.
( Virender Singh )
Judge
November 13, 2024(ps)
