Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:HHC:20578 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO No. : 544 of 2025 Decided on : 30.06.2025 Rohit Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Another …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Petitioner in person with Mr. Sumit Bains, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 in person with Mr. Rajat Kumar, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge
(oral). PetitionerRohit Kumar has filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for quashing of FIR No.229 of 2024, dated 29.12.2024, registered with Police Station, Dhalli, District Shimla, H.P., under Sections 85 and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’), as well 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:20578 as, the proceedings resultant thereto, which are stated to be pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, District Shimla, 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 petitioner, on the statement of respondent No.2, the FIR, in question, has been registered against him. 4. After registration of the FIR, the police has conducted the investigation and submitted the charge sheet, which is now pending adjudication before the learned trial Court. 5. According to the petitioner, during the pendency of the case, he and respondent No.2, has compromised the matter and respondent No.2 is now happily residing with the petitioner in the matrimonial home. The terms and conditions of the compromise have been reduced into writing, which is Ex.PA.
6. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made that the FIR, as well as, proceedings, resultant
3 2025:HHC:20578 thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, may be quashed and set aside, by allowing the petition. 7. When put to notice, the State has filed the status report, disclosing therein the manner, in which, the FIR, in question, has been registered and the manner, in which, the police has investigated the matter and submitted the chargesheet, before the learned trial Court. 8.
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, has now settled the matter with the petitioner, vide compromise Ex.PA. 9. Respondent No.2, while appearing before this Court, has deposed that she was married to the petitioner on 01.07.2021. Thereafter, she and petitioner have been blessed with one son namely Sanyam Kashyap. 10. Respondent No.2 has further deposed that due to some differences, which had arisen between her and her husband, she has lodged FIR, in question, against the petitioner. After registration of the FIR, the police had conducted the investigation and submitted the final report, which is pending before the learned trial Court. 4 2025:HHC:20578
11. Respondent No.2, has further deposed that now, during the pendency of the trial, the matter has been settled between her and the petitioner. Now, she is residing happily with the petitioner, in the matrimonial home. She has specifically stated that she has no objection, in case, the petition is allowed as prayed for. 12. Similar type of statement has also been made by the petitioner, on oath. 13. Heard. 14. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.2, is stated to have taken place on 01.07.2021 and they have also been blessed with a son. However, compelled by the circumstances, it seems that due to some misunderstanding, respondent No.2 had lodged the FIR, in question, against the petitioner, in which, the police had conducted the investigation and submitted the final report, which is now pending before the learned trial Court. 15. The efforts, made by the petitioner, have resulted into settlement of the matter and respondent No.2 has now started residing with the petitioner, in the matrimonial home. 5 2025:HHC:20578
16. Not only this, as per the categoric stand, taken by respondent No.2, all the disputes, between petitioner and respondent No.2, have now been settled and they have entered into the compromise, the terms and conditions of which have been reduced into writing, vide compromise deed Ex.PA. 17.
The primary purpose of the law is to maintain peace and harmony in the society. When, petitioner and respondent No.2 have now started residing together, in the matrimonial home, after settling all the disputes, then, the sincere efforts, which they have made, must be recognized by the Court, by accepting the present petition, as prayed for. 18. Even otherwise, if respondent No.2 is compelled to pursue the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, 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 the petitioner and respondent No.2, as well as, their minor son. 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
6 2025:HHC:20578 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. 20. Considering all these facts, the petition is allowed and FIR No.229/2024, dated 29.12.2024, registered with Police Station, Dhalli, District Shimla, H.P., under Sections 85 and 115(2) of the BNS, as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, are ordered to be quashed. 21. The compromise Annexure P4 and the statements of the parties, recorded today, shall form part of the judgment. 22. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. ( Virender Singh ) Judge June 30, 2025(ps)