IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No.64/2025. Date of Decision: 21st January, 2025. Manish Kumar Sharma and another .....Petitioners. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …..Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Vacation Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. C.D. Negi, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Diwakar Dev Sharma and Mr. Harinder Rawat Additional Advocates General with Ms. Swati Draik, Deputy Advocate General. ASI Rita Kumari, W.P.S. Dharamshala, present in person. Bipin Chander Negi, Vacation Judge (oral). By way of instant petition filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, a prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of FIR No.01 of 2025 dated 05.01.2025, under Sections 64, 69 and 351(2) of BNS, 2023, registered at Women Police Station, Dharamshala District Kangra, H.P., as well as consequential judicial proceedings arising out of the same. 2. The averments contained in the petition, which are duly supported by an affidavit reveal that on 05.01.2025, petitioner No.2 had got a FIR registered against the petitioner No.1-accused, under Sections under Sections 64, 69 and 351(2) of BNS, 2023. However, during the pendency of proceedings, the dispute inter se parties has been settled 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 amicably vide compromise dated 09.01.2025, copy whereof is appended alongwith the present petition as Exhibit P-1. In terms of the compromise, Petitioner No.2 got married with petitioner No.1 (Manish Kumar Sharma) on 08.01.2025. Copy of the marriage certificate duly attested by the parties is taken on record. 3. Statement of petitioner No.2 stands recorded. She has categorically stated that she has entered into a compromise of her own free will, volition and without any pressure. According to the petitioner No.2, the dispute inter se parties stands amicably settled. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 5. This Court sees no impediment in quashing the FIR in issue, as the dispute inter se parties stands amicably resolved. 6. From a perusal of Section 359 of the BNSS (320 Cr.PC), it is evident that the offences under Section 64 of the BNS, 2023 is not compoundable. 7. In this respect, attention of this Court has been drawn to a case titled Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another reported as (2014) 6 Supreme Court Cases, 466, wherein the Apex Court has categorically laid down that the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases, which are not compoundable, where the parties have amicably settled the matter inter se them. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution, in cases where settlement is arrived at. The guiding factors 3 being securing the ends of justice or to prevent an abuse of the process of any Court. 8. Further, the Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir alias Parbathbhai Bhimsinghbhai Karmur and others vs. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641 summarizing the broad principles regarding inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has recognized that these powers are not inhibited by provisions of Section 320 Cr.P.C. 9. In view of the fact that the parties have entered into compromise permitting the proceedings in pursuance to the aforesaid FIR sought to be quashed to continue would only result into an abuse of process and the same would not secure the ends of justice. 10. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No.01 of 2025 dated 05.01.2025, under Sections 64, 69 and 351(2) of BNS, 2023, registered at Women Police Station, Dharamshala District Kangra, H.P., is quashed and consequent judicial proceedings arising out of the same are also quashed. 11. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Bipin Chander Negi) Vacation Judge 21st January, 2025 (tarun)