1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 349 of 2025 Decided on : 24.7.2025 Tushar Tyagi & anr. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & anr. …Respondents ___________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge Whether approved for reporting? ________________________________________________ For the Petitioners : Petitioners in person with Mr. Abhishek Walia and Ms. Vidushi Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondents :Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Addl. A.G., for respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 2 in person with Mr. J.P. Sharma, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge (oral) The petitioners have filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.N.S.S.) for quashing of FIR No. 43 of 2025, dated 20.3.2025 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the FIR in question’), registered under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 351 (2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS’) with Police Station, Majra, District Sirmour, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, on the basis of the compromise, which has taken place, between the parties. 2. Brief facts, leading to filing of the present petition, as borne out, from the pleadings, as well as, copy of FIR, are as under: 2.1 Respondent No. 2, Gaurav Kumar, put the criminal machinery into motion, by lodging FIR in question, against the petitioners, on the ground that he was asked to transfer the money, in the accounts of petitioners. According to respondent No. 2, he had paid a sum of Rs. 36,00,000/-, as the petitioners had assured to send him to Australia. For the said purpose, a sum of Rs. 48,00,000/- was settled, between the parties. The aforesaid amount was allegedly taken by the petitioners for Permanent Residentship. 3 2.2 On the basis of above facts, the Police registered the FIR and thereafter, criminal machinery swung into motion and the Police has started investigation. 2.3 It is the further case of the petitioners that during investigation, the matter has been compromised between the parties, with the intervention of the respectables of the society, and the matter has now been settled. 4. In order to buttress their contention, the petitioners have relied upon the photo copy of the compromise, which has allegedly been taken place between the parties. 5. On the basis of above, a prayer for quashing the FIR in question, has been made. 6. When, put to notice, respondent-State has filed the status report, disclosing therein about the fact that FIR in question has been registered on the complaint of respondent No.2. It is the further case of the respondent-State that both the petitioners Tushar 4 Tyagi and Kajal were associated in the investigation and were bound down for joining the investigation. Petitioner Tushar Tyagi is running a company, under the name of ‘Shivay Immigration’. 7. It is the further case of the respondent-State that some amount was got transferred, in the account of petitioner No. 2. Apart from this, it has also been pleaded in the status report that the matter has now been settled between the petitioners and respondent No. 2 and settlement with regard to the amount, allegedly paid by respondent No.2, has also been taken place, between the parties. 8. Respondent No. 2, who, at one point of time, had levelled allegations against the petitioners, today appeared before this Court and made statement on oath, exonerating the petitioners from all the allegations, which have been levelled, against them. He has categorically stated that dispute between him and petitioners has arisen, on account of some mis- understanding and according to him, now the mis- 5 understanding has been cleared, vide compromise deed, Annexure P-2, which, according to him, bears his signatures. 9. Lastly, respondent No. 2, in unequivocal terms, has stated that he has no objection, in case, on the basis of compromise, the present petition is allowed. 10. Similar type of statement has also been made by the petitioners. 11. The Police registered the FIR under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 351 (2) and 3(5) of the BNS. The material question, which arises for determination, before this Court, is with regard to the fact that dispute, which is stated to have been settled, between the parties, is the dispute between the parties or it has any effect upon public at large. 12. Considering the stand, which has been taken by respondent No. 1, the dispute with regard to the alleged payment, received by the petitioners, on account of sending respondent No. 2 to Australia and 6 helping him in getting the Permanent Residentship, to the considered opinion of this Court, is private in nature, and when, the parties to the litigation, i.e. petitioners and respondent No. 2 have settled the matter and terms and conditions of the same have been reduced into writing, vide photo copy of compromise deed, Annexure P-2, then, chances of success of the prosecution case, are not so bright. 13. Moreover, acceptance of the compromise would also save the precious judicial time of the Police, as they have so many cases to inquire into. 14. Considering all these facts, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 43 of 2025, dated 20.3.2025 registered under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 351 (2) and 3(5) of BNS, as well as, proceedings consequent thereto, are ordered to be quashed. 15. The statements of the parties and the compromise, Annexure P-2, be read as part of the judgment. 7 16. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Virender Singh) Judge July 24, 2025 Kalpana