1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 1224 of 2025 Decided on : 17.12.2025 Yogesh Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & ors. …Respondents ___________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge Whether approved for reporting? ________________________________________________ For the Petitioner : Petitioner in person with Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Dy.A.G. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in person with Ms. Aarti Thakur, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge (oral) The petitioner has filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.N.S.S.) for quashing of FIR No. 67 of 2025, dated 14.6.2025, 2 under Sections 281, 125(A), 125 (B) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS’) registered with Police Station, Tahliwal, District Una, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 3, Una, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’). 2. Brief facts, as borne out from the record are that on 14.6.2025 at about 6:07 p.m., a telephonic information was received that on Bathdi-Tahliwal road near Gurplah liquor vend, an accident had taken place, upon which, a police team reached at the spot. Respondent No. 3 Sukhjinder Singh got recorded his statement under Section 173 of BNSS that on the aforesaid date, respondent No. 2 was trying to cross the road, and suddenly, a motorcycle, bearing registration No. HP 20B-0490 hit him. 3. Thereafter, on the statement of respondent No. 3, FIR in question was registered. 4. During investigation of the case, the matter has been compromised between the parties. 3 5. The terms and conditions of the compromise have been reduced into writing, and the terms and conditions of the compromise have been reduced into writing, as Annexure C-5. 6. On all these submissions, a prayer to allow the present petition, by quashing the FIR in question, as well as, proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, has been made. 7. 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 and criminal machinery swung into motion. 8. It is the further case of respondent No. 1 that after completion of investigation, report under Section 173(2) of Cr. P.C. has been filed. Cognizance has been taken by the learned trial Court and the matter is stated to be pending adjudication, before the learned trial Court. 9. Today, respondent No. 3, who, has put criminal machinery into motion, has appeared in Court and has made a statement, on oath, about the 4 manner, in which, he has lodged the FIR in question and factum of the compromise, which has been effected, between the parties. According to him, there was no negligence on part of the petitioner, in the accident in question, as the same had taken place, due to the fact that respondent No. 2 was trying to cross the road, without looking for the traffic on the road. 10. Lastly, respondent No. 3, in unequivocal terms, has deposed that he does not want to proceed further with the matter. He has also stated that he has no objection, in case, the present petition is allowed and the FIR in question and the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, are quashed. 11. Similar type of statement has also been made by the petitioner. 12. Heard. 13. From the facts, as mentioned in the petition, as well as, the factual position, as narrated in the status report, this Court is of the view that the matter has now been compromised, between the parties. 5 14. The person, who has put the criminal machinery into motion, by lodging FIR in question, when, appeared before this Court, has stated that the compromise has been effected between the parties. In addition to this, he has exonerated the petitioner from the allegations of rash and negligent driving, by deposing that he was not negligent while driving and the accident in question had taken place, due to the fact that respondent No. 2 was trying to cross the road, without looking the traffic on the road. Lastly, he has submitted that he has no objection, in case the present petition is allowed. 15. In view of the compromise having been effected, between the parties, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 do not want to proceed further with the case and has specifically stated that he has no objection, in case, the present petition is allowed and the FIR in question, as well as, proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, are quashed. 16. The primary purpose of law is to maintain peace in the society and when, the parties to the lis, 6 i.e. petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 and 3, have buried their disputes and compromised the matter, then, the continuation of the criminal proceedings, arising out of the FIR in question, lodged by respondent No. 3, would certainly amount to abuse of the process of law. 17. Acceptance of the compromise will help the parties to live peacefully in the society and 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. 18. When, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have exonerated the petitioner from the allegations of rash and negligent driving, in that eventuality, chances of success of the prosecution case, against the petitioner, are not so bright, as such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings alive. 19. Considering all these facts, the present petition is allowed and FIR in question, as well as, proceedings 7 resultant thereto, pending adjudication before the learned trial Court, are quashed. 20. The statements, so recorded, and the compromise Annexure C-5 be read as part of the judgment. 21. The present petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Virender Singh) Judge December 17, 2025 Kalpana