2025:HHC:44601 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO No. 1177 of 2025 Decided on : 18.12.2025 Pawna Kumari & 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 : All petitioners in person, with Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by HC Sandeep Patial No. 34, I.O. Police Station Jawalamukhi, District Kangra, H.P., for respondents No.1 to 3/State. Respondents No. 4 & 5 in person with Ms. Kalaunta Devi, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) Petitioners have approached this Court, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:44601 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for quashing of FIR No. 104/2019, dated 26.06.2019, (hereinafter referred to as “FIR in question”) registered under Sections 147, 149, 323, 342, 427, 451, 201 of IPC, with Police Station Jawalamukhi, District Kangra, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, which are pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 2, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as “the trial Court”), on the basis of the compromise, which is stated to have taken place between the petitioners and respondents No. 4 & 5. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that the FIR in question was registered at the instance of respondent No. 4, Sh. Parveen Kumar, in which, he had alleged that petitioners stopped/protested to open the liquor vend and made huge loss to him, despite order of competent authority. Thereafter, respondent No. 4, reported the matter to the police. 3. On the basis of above facts, police registered the FIR in question and criminal machinery swung into motion. 3 2025:HHC:44601 4. As stated above, after completion of the investigation, police has filed the charge sheet, which is pending before the learned trial Court. 5. As per the case of the petitioners, during the pendency of the proceedings, before the learned trial Court, the matter has been settled between the parties, with the intervention of the respectable members of the society. The terms and conditions of the compromise were reduced into writing and the same has been annexed with the petition, as Annexure P-2. On the basis of Annexure P-2, a prayer has been made to allow the petition by quashing the FIR in question. 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 how the police had conducted the investigation and filed the charge sheet against the petitioners, which is pending before the learned trial Court. 7. Respondents No. 4 and 5, who at one point of time, had levelled the allegations against the petitioners, when appeared before this Court today, have made their 4 2025:HHC:44601 separate statements, exonerating the petitioners from the allegations, which have been levelled against them, affirming that the FIR in question was lodged by respondent No. 4 (Parveen Kumar) on account of a trivial matter and now, matter has been compromised between them, with the intervention of the respectable members of the society. The said compromise has been annexed with the petition as Annexure P-2. 8. Respondents No. 4 & 5 have also deposed that they have no objection, if the petition is allowed, in view of the compromise and the FIR in question is quashed. 9. Similar type of statement has also been made by the petitioners jointly. 10. Heard. 11. In view of the statements of the parties, especially the statements of respondents No. 4 & 5, who at one point of time, had lodged the FIR in question, but, when appeared before this Court, have exonerated them, by stating that the matter has been compromised between them, with the intervention of the respectable members of 5 2025:HHC:44601 the society, this Court is fully satisfied with regard to the genuineness of the compromise Annexure P-2. 12. As per the stand taken by the parties i.e. petitioners, as well as, respondents No. 4 & 5, the scuffle had taken place on account of a trivial matter and the matter has now been compromised. 13. The primary purpose of law is to maintain peace and harmony in the society. When, the petitioners and respondents No. 4 & 5 have buried all their disputes, by compromising the matter, then, permitting the proceedings to continue, before the learned trial Court, would be nothing, but, abuse of the process of law. 14. Even otherwise, acceptance of the compromise, by this Court, will save the precious judicial time of the learned trial Court, which, the learned trial Court will be in a position to devote for the decision of some other serious matters, pending before it. 15. Considering all these facts, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 104/2019 dated 26.06.2019, registered under Sections 147, 149, 323, 342, 427, 451, 201 of IPC, with Police Station Jawalamukhi, District 6 2025:HHC:44601 Kangra, H.P., as well as, the proceedings, resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, are ordered to be quashed. 16. The compromise deed, Annexure P-2, and the statements of the parties, recorded today, shall form part of the judgment. 17. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. ( Virender Singh ) Judge 18th December, 2025 (Pramod)