Himachal Pradesh High Court
Date Of Decision: 14.05.2025 vs State Of H.P. & Another on 14 May, 2025
Author: Virender Singh
Bench: Virender Singh
1 2025:HHC:14368 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
SHIMLA
Cr.MMO No.294 of 2025
Date of Decision: 14.05.2025
Dr. Dinesh Kumar Kaushal & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
State of H.P. & another .....Respondents
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
___________________________________________________________________________________________
For the Petitioners : Mr. Ashwani Pathak, Senior
Advocate, with Mr. Dev Raj,
Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Mr. Varun
Chandel and Mr. H.S. Rawat,
Additional Advocates General, with
Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate
General, for respondent No.1/State
Mr. Chander Shekhar Thakur,
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.46 of
2023, dated 06.12.2023, (hereinafter referred to as the FIR, in
question), registered with Women Police Station, Una, District
Una, H.P., under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 and 406 of the Indian
Penal Code, (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC'), as well as, the
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2 2025:HHC:14368 )
proceedings resultant thereto, which are stated to be pending
before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una, District
Una, H.P., (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, the marriage of petitioner
No.3 was solemnized with respondent No.2, as per Hindu rites and
rituals, on 21.05.2023. Thereafter, some matrimonial dispute has
arisen between petitioner No.3 and respondent No.2.
Subsequently, respondent No.2 has lodged the FIR, in question,
against the petitioners.
4. It is the case of the petitioners that after registration of
FIR, the police has investigated the matter and the final report,
under Section 173(2) of CrPC, has been submitted, which is
pending adjudication, before the learned trial Court.
5. It is the further case of the petitioners that thereafter, a
petition, under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, was filed,
before the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge-III, Family
Court, Una, District Una, H.P., for dissolution of the marriage of
petitioner No.3 and respondent No.2, by decree of divorce by way
of mutual consent. The said petition was allowed by the learned
3 2025:HHC:14368 )
Additional Principal Judge-III, Family Court, Una, District Una, vide
judgment dated 19.03.2025.
6. According to the petitioners, thereafter, the matter has
been compromised between both the parties, vide Annexure P-3.
7. On the basis of the said compromise, a prayer has
been made to allow the petition, as prayed for, by quashing the
FIR, in question, as well as, proceedings resultant thereto, pending
before the learned trial Court.
8. When, put to notice, respondent No.1-State 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 manner, in which, the
investigation has been conducted, by the police, in this case.
9. Today, respondent No.2-complainant has made a
statement, on oath, (through video conferencing) that her marriage
was solemnized with petitioner No.3 on 21.05.2023. After the
marriage, due to non-compatibility of temperament, it was not
possible for her to live in the matrimonial home with her husband
(petitioner No.3) and due to all these facts, she lodged the FIR, in
question, against the petitioners.
10. As per further deposition of respondent No.2, petitioner
No.3 had filed the petition, under Section 13-B of the Hindu
4 2025:HHC:14368 )
Marriage Act, for dissolution of her marriage with petitioner No.3,
by way of decree of divorce, before the Court of learned Additional
Principal Judge-II, Family Court, Una, District Una, H.P. The said
petition was allowed, vide judgment dated 19.03.2025 (Annexure-
P-4).
11. Respondent No.2 has further deposed that her
marriage with petitioner No.3 has now been dissolved and the
matter has been compromised between her and the petitioners, as
such, she does not want to proceed further with the FIR, in
question.
12. Apart from this, respondent No.2 has also shown her
voluntariness and willingness to enter into the compromise with
the petitioners, by stating that she has entered into the
compromise with the petitioners voluntarily and without any
influence from any person.
13. In addition to this, respondent No.2 has made no
objection, in case, the present petition is allowed and the FIR, in
question, as well as, the resultant proceedings, thereto, are
quashed.
14. Today i.e. on 14.05.2025, similar statements of the
petitioners (through video conferencing) have also been recorded,
on oath.
5 2025:HHC:14368 )
15. Heard.
16. In this case, the criminal machinery was put into
motion, by respondent No.2, by lodging the FIR, in question,
against the petitioners, however, when, appeared before this
Court, she has exonerated the petitioners from the allegations, as
levelled, in this case.
17. Once, the person, who had put the criminal machinery
into motion, has exonerated the petitioners from the allegations, by
stating, on oath, that the matter has been compromised between
them, in such situation, the chances of success of prosecution
case, against the petitioners, are not so bright.
18. When, the parties admittedly have buried all their
disputes, by compromising the matter, vide Annexure P-3, then,
permitting the proceedings to continue, would be nothing, but,
abuse of the process of law.
19. The primary purpose of law is to maintain peace and
harmony in the society. Acceptance of the petition would also give
another opportunity to the petitioners, as well as, respondent No.2
to live peacefully in the society.
20. Even otherwise, acceptance of the compromise, by
this Court, will save the precious judicial time of the learned trial
Court, which, the learned trial Court will be in a position to devote
6 2025:HHC:14368 )
for the decision of some other serious matters, pending before it.
Moreover, this Court is satisfied with the genuineness of the
compromise (Annexure P-3), entered into between the parties.
21. Considering all these facts, the petition is allowed and
FIR No.46 of 2023, dated 06.12.2023, registered with Women
Police Station, Una, District Una, H.P., under Sections 498-A, 504,
506 and 406 of the IPC, as well as, the proceedings resultant
thereto, against the petitioners, are ordered to be quashed.
22. The compromise, Annexure P-3, and the statements of
the parties, recorded today in the Court, shall form part of the
judgment.
23. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also
stand disposed of accordingly.
(Virender Singh)
Judge
May 14, 2025
(subhash)
