2025:HHC:16747 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO No.396 of 2025 Decided on : 30.05.2025 Sahil Bedi …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Skandh Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. H.S. Rawat and Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Additional Advocates General for respondent No.1/State. Mr. Vivek Thakur, Advocate for respondent No.2. Virender Singh, Judge (oral) Petitioner has filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for quashing of FIR No.86/2023, dated 02.05.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the FIR, in question), registered with Police Station, Baijnath, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 498-A, 323 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code, (hereinafter referred to 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:16747 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, Baijnath, 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 petitioner and respondent No.2. 3. According to the petitioner, FIR in question was lodged by respondent No.2, against him, mentioning therein that her marriage was solemnized in June, 2018 with Hindu rites at Village Paprola and out of the said wedlock, two children were born. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.2 had lodged the FIR in question due to some misunderstanding, between the parties and according to him, now, the matter has been compromised between them, vide compromise Annexure P-2 and respondent No.2 is now residing happily with him in her matrimonial home. 5. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to quash the FIR, in question, as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, by allowing the petition. 3 2025:HHC:16747 6. When put to notice, respondent No.1 has filed the status report, disclosing therein, the manner, in which, the FIR, in question, has been registered, at the instance of respondent No.2, as well as, the manner, in which, the police has conducted the investigation, in this case and submitted the final report, which is pending adjudication, before the learned trial Court. 7. The person, who, at one point of time, had put the criminal machinery into motion, by lodging the FIR, in question, by levelling allegations, as mentioned in it, now has settled the matter with the petitioner, vide compromise Annexure P-2. 8. Respondent No.2, while appearing before this Court, has deposed that she was married to petitioner on 20.06.2018. Thereafter, she and petitioner have been blessed with one son and one daughter. 9. Respondent No.2 has further deposed that due to some misunderstanding, she had lodged FIR, in question, against the petitioner. After registration of the FIR, the police has conducted the investigation and submitted the final report, which is pending before the learned trial Court. 4 2025:HHC:16747 10. Respondent No.2 has further deposed that during the pendency of the case, before the learned trial Court, as well as, with the intervention of the respectables of the society, the dispute, between her and petitioner, has been settled. Now, she is residing happily with the petitioner, in her matrimonial home. She has specifically stated that she has no objection, in case, the present petition is allowed, as prayed for. 11. Not only this, respondent No.2 has identified her signatures, over the compromise, Annexure P-2 and also shown her voluntariness and willingness to enter into the compromise with the petitioner, by stating that the compromise has been effected out of her free will, consent and without any pressure. 12. Today i.e. on 30.05.2025, similar statement of petitioner has also been recorded, on oath. 13. Heard. 14. The marriage, between the petitioner and respondent No.2, is stated to have been solemnized on 20.06.2018 and thereafter, both of them have been blessed with two children, a son and a daughter. However, compelled by the circumstances, it seems that due to some 5 2025:HHC:16747 misunderstanding, respondent No.2 had lodged the FIR, in question, against the petitioner, in which, the police has conducted the investigation and submitted the final report, which is pending before the learned trial Court. 15. With the passage of time, good sense has prevailed upon them and they have compromised the matter, vide compromise Annexure P-2. The said compromise is stated to have been taken place between the parties, during the pendency of the case, before the learned trial Court, as well as, with the intervention of the respectables of the society. 16. The efforts, made by those persons, have resulted in the settlement of the matter and respondent No.2 has now started residing happily with the petitioner in her matrimonial home. Not only this, as per the categorical stand, taken by respondent No.2, all the disputes, between her and the petitioner, have now been settled and the terms and conditions of the compromise have been reduced into writing, vide compromise Annexure P-2. 17. The primary purpose of the law is to maintain peace and harmony in the society. When, the petitioner 6 2025:HHC:16747 and respondent No.2 have now started residing together, in the matrimonial home, after settling all the disputes, then, the sincere efforts, which they had made, must be recognized by the Court, by accepting the present petition, as prayed for. Moreover, this Court is satisfied with the genuineness of the compromise Annexure P-2, entered into between the parties. 18. Even otherwise, if, respondent No.2 is compelled to pursue the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, which are pending before the learned trial Court, it would be nothing, but, abuse of the process of law and it would also adversely affect the matrimonial life of petitioner and respondent No.2, as well as, their two children. 19. 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, will also save the valuable relations between the parties i.e. petitioner 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 matters, pending before it. 7 2025:HHC:16747 20. In view of the discussions, made hereinabove, the petition is allowed and FIR No.86/2023, dated 02.05.2023, registered with Police Station, Baijnath, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 498-A, 323 and 325 of the IPC, as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, are ordered to be quashed. 21. The compromise Annexure P-2 and the statements of the parties, recorded today, shall form part of the judgment. 22. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. ( Virender Singh ) Judge May 30, 2025 (Gaurav Thakur)