1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MMO No.664 of 2024 Date of Decision: 18.06.2025 Deepak Ranote & Ors …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …..Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners : Mr. H.S. Rana, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma and Mr. H.S Rawat, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2/State. Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents. Name of respondent No.10 stands deleted. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) The petitioners have filed the present petition, under Section 482 read with Section 390 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Cr.PC.’) for quashing of FIR No.298 of 2022, dated 09.11.2022 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the FIR in question’), registered under Sections 147, 148, 149 & 323 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’) with Police Station, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalagarh, District Solan, 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, on the statement of respondent No.3, the FIR, in question, has been registered against the them. 4. After registration of the FIR, the police has conducted the investigation and submitted the final report, which is now pending adjudication, before the learned trial Court. 5. The terms and conditions of the compromise have been reduced into writing, which are annexed with the petition, as, Annexure P-2. 6. On the basis of the said compromise, a prayer has been made to allow the petition, as prayed for, by quashing of FIR No.298 of 2022, as well as, all the proceedings resultant thereto. 7. When put to notice, the respondents No.1 & 2-State have filed the status report, disclosing therein the manner, in 3 which, the FIR, in question, has been registered and the manner, in which, the police has investigated the matter. 8. Respondent No.3, who, at one point of time, had levelled the allegations against the petitioners and has lodged the FIR, in question, appeared, before this Court and made a statement, on oath, that due to misunderstanding, he had lodged FIR, in question, against the petitioners. He has deposed that with the intervention of the respectables of the society and in order to maintain their cordial relations and to live peacefully in the society, the matter has now been compromised. 9. Similar type of statements have been made by the petitioners, as well as, other respondents. 10. Heard. 11. As per the stand taken by the parties, the dispute between them has now been settled. The terms and conditions of the compromise, have been placed on record as Annexure P-2. 12. The criminal machinery, in the present case, has been put into motion, by respondent No.3, by lodging the FIR, in question. However, as per the stand, taken by petitioners 4 and respondent No.3, they have compromised the matter, vide compromise, Annexure P-2. 13. The terms and conditions, which have been agreed upon by the parties, in order to settle all the disputes, should be honoured by the Court, as no useful purpose would be achieved, by keeping the proceedings alive. 14. Acceptance of the compromise will also save the precious judicial time of the learned trial Court, as the learned trial Court will be in a position to devote such time for deciding some other serious disputes, pending before it. 15. Moreover, this Court is satisfied with the genuineness of the compromise, Annexure P-2, entered into between the parties, as, respondent No.3, while appearing before this Court has categorically stated that he was not under any pressure for entering into the compromise. 16. Considering all these facts, the petition is allowed and FIR No.298 of 2024, dated 09.11.2022, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149 & 323 of IPC, with Police Station, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, are ordered to be quashed, against the petitioners, namely, Deepak Ranote, Labh Singh, Davinder Singh and Ravinder Kumar. 5 17. The Compromise Deed, Annexure P-2, and the statements of the parties, recorded before this Court shall form part of the judgment. 18. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. (Virender Singh) Judge June 18, 2025 (subhash)