2025:HHC:14454 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO No.340 of 2025 Decided on : 16.05.2025 Pawan Kumar & Anr. …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 : Petitioners in person with Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma and Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 in person with Ms. Gayatri, Advocate. 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.99/2017, dated 18.07.2017 (hereinafter referred to as the FIR, in question), registered with Police Station, Fatehpur, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 323, 324, 341, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:14454 referred to as the ‘IPC’), as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, which are stated to be pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’). 2. The relief of quashing has been sought, on the basis of the compromise, which has taken place between the petitioners and respondent No.2. 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 and respondent No.2 are of same village and with the intervention of the respectables of the society and in order to maintain their future cordial relations, they have compromised the matter with each other. 3 2025:HHC:14454 6. The terms and conditions of the compromise have been reduced into writing, vide Compromise Deed Annexure P-3. 7. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made that the FIR, in question, 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.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. Respondent No.2, at one point of time, had put the criminal machinery into motion, and when, appeared before this Court today i.e. on 16.05.2025, has deposed that he has compromised the matter with the petitioners, out of his free will, consent and without any pressure of any person, vide Compromise Deed Annexure P-3. He, in unequivocal terms, has deposed that he has no objection, in case, the present petition is allowed, as prayed for. 4 2025:HHC:14454 10. Similar joint statement has also been made by the petitioners, on oath. 11. Heard. 12. The person, who had put the criminal machinery into motion, is respondent No.2. Respondent No.2, while appearing, before this Court, has categorically deposed that the petitioners are his co-villagers and with the intervention of the respectables of the society and in order to maintain their future cordial relations, he has compromised the matter with the petitioners. 13. The primary purpose of law is to maintain peace and harmony in the society. When, the petitioners and respondent No.2 have buried all the disputes by compromising the matter, then, permitting the proceedings to continue, before the learned trial Court, would be nothing, but, abuse of the process of law. 14. 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 for the decision of some other serious matters, pending before it. 5 2025:HHC:14454 15. Considering all these facts, the petition is allowed and FIR No.99/2017, dated 18.07.2017, registered with Police Station, Fatehpur, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 323, 324, 341, 506 and 34 of the IPC, as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, are ordered to be quashed. 16. The Compromise Deed, Annexure P-3, and the statements of the parties, shall form part of the judgment. 17. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. ( Virender Singh ) Judge May 16, 2025 (Gaurav Thakur)