1  ( 2025:HHC:40939 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MMO No.986 of 2025 Date of Decision: 28.11.2025 Uday Goswani & 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 : Petitioners in person with Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3/State. Respondent No.4 in person with Mr. Pankaj Thakur, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) Petitioners have filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for quashing of FIR No.66 of 2025, dated 03.04.2025, registered with Police Station, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 118(1) & 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’), as well as, proceedings resultant thereto, if any. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2  ( 2025:HHC:40939 ) 2. The relief of quashing has been sought on the basis of the compromise, effected between the parties. 3. According to the petitioners, on 02.04.2025, respondent No.4, had made a complaint before the police at Police Station Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. The complainant is a shopkeeper, by profession and on 02.04.2025, he along with his friend Sidharth Purohit had gone for a drive. When, he and his friend, parked the vehicle at Niyugal bridge and were talking with each other, then, at about 11:00 PM, a black coloured Scorpio No. HP37H-6200, being driven by its driver, reached at the bridge. The driver stopped the car, on the bridge and some other people were also sitting in it. A boy alighted down from the said car and proceeded towards the complainant. The boy appeared to be intoxicated to the complainant. Thereafter, a scuffle had taken place between the complainant and the persons sitting in the Scorpio car. Thereafter, the police has registered the FIR in question. 4. After registration of the FIR, the police has conducted the investigation and prepared the charge-sheet, which is under scrutiny. 5. During the pendency of the investigation, the matter has been compromised between the petitioners and 3  ( 2025:HHC:40939 ) respondent No. 4-complainant. On the basis of the said compromise, a prayer has been made to allow the petition, as prayed for, by quashing of FIR No.66 of 2025, as well as, all the proceedings resultant thereto, if any. 6. When, put to notice, respondents No.1 to 3-State have 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. 7. The person, who, at one point of time, has levelled the allegations against the petitioners, and has lodged the FIR, in question, appeared today, before this Court and made a statement, on oath, that on his statement, the police had lodged the FIR, in question, against the petitioners. He has deposed that with the intervention of the respectables of the society and in order to maintain future cordial relations with each other, the matter has been compromised between them. He has also deposed that he has entered into the compromise with the petitioners, out of his free will, consent and without any pressure. 8. Similar type of joint statement has been made by the petitioners, on oath. 9. Heard. 4  ( 2025:HHC:40939 ) 10. As per the stand taken by the parties, the dispute between them has now been settled. The terms and conditions of the settlement, have been reduced into writing, vide compromise deed, Annexure P-2. 11. The criminal machinery, in the present case, has put into motion, by respondent No.4, by lodging the FIR, in question. However, as per the stand, taken by the petitioners, as well as, respondent No.4, they have compromised the matter, vide Annexure P-2. 12. 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 allowing the proceedings to continue. 13. Acceptance of the compromise will also save the precious time of the court, where the charge-sheet would be filed, in future and that Court would be in a position to devote such time, in some other serious disputes, pending before it. 14. Considering all these facts, the present petition is allowed and FIR bearing No.66 of 2025, dated 03.04.2025, registered with Police Station Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 118(1) & (2), 324(5) and 3(5) of BNS, as well as, proceedings resultant thereto, if any. 5  ( 2025:HHC:40939 ) 15. The compromise deeds, as well as, statements of the parties, recorded today shall form part of this order. 16. The present petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Virender Singh) Judge November 28, 2025 (subhash)