1 2025:HHC:9725 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MMO No.251 of 2025 Date of Decision: 08.04.2025 Baldev & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & another …..Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners : Petitioners in person with Mr. Lalit Kumar Sehgal, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. H.S. Rawat and Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocates General for the respondents/State. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) The petitioners have filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.N.S.S.’) for quashing of FIR No.182 of 2020, dated 09.11.2020 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the FIR in question’), registered under Sections 325, 147 and 148, of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’) with Police Station, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’). 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:9725 ) 2. The relief of quashing has been sought on the basis of the compromise, effected between the parties. 3. According to petitioners No.1 to 5, on the statement of petitioner No.6, the FIR, in question, has been registered against them. 4. After registration of the FIR, the police has conducted the investigation and submitted the final report, which is now pending adjudication, before the learned trial Court. 5. The terms and conditions of the compromise have been reduced into writing, which are annexed with the petition, as, Annexure P-2. 6. On the basis of the said compromise, a prayer has been made to allow the petition, as prayed for, by quashing of FIR No.182 of 2020, as well as, all the proceedings resultant thereto. 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. 8. The person, who, at one point of time, has levelled the allegations against petitioners No.1 to 5, and has lodged the FIR, in question, i.e. petitioner No.6, appeared today, before this 3 2025:HHC:9725 ) Court and made a statement, on oath, that due to misunderstanding, he had lodged the FIR, in question, against petitioners No.1 to 5. He has deposed that with the intervention of the respectable persons of the society and in order to maintain cordial relations, the matter has been compromised. 9. Similar type of statements have been made by the petitioners No.1 to 5, on oath. 10. Heard. 11. As per the stand taken by the parties, the dispute between them has now been settled. The terms and conditions of the compromise, have been placed on record as Annexure P-2. 12. The criminal machinery, in the present case, has been put into motion, by petitioner No.6, by lodging the FIR, in question. However, as per the stand, taken by petitioners No.1 to 5, as well as, petitioners No.6, they have compromised the matter, vide compromise, Annexure P-2. 13. 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 keeping the proceedings alive. 14. Acceptance of the compromise will also save the precious judicial time of the learned trial Court, as the learned trial 4 2025:HHC:9725 ) Court will be in a position to devote such time for deciding some other serious disputes, pending before it. 15. Moreover, this Court is satisfied with the genuineness of the compromise, Annexure P-2, entered into between the parties, as, petitioner No.6, while appearing before this Court has categorically stated that he was not under any pressure for entering into the compromise. 16. Considering all these facts, the petition is allowed and FIR No.182/2020, dated 09.11.2020 registered with Police Station, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P., under Sections 325, 147 and 148 of IPC, as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, are ordered to be quashed. 17. The Compromise Deed, Annexure P-2, and the statements of the parties, recorded before this Court shall form part of the judgment. 18. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. (Virender Singh) Judge April 08, 2025 (subhash)