Shri Vipin Singh vs State Of Hp And Another on 11 March, 2019

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Shri Vipin Singh vs State Of Hp And Another on 11 March, 2019

Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                       Cr.MMO No. 575 of 2018
                                                       Decided on: 11.3.2019




                                                                           .
    Shri Vipin Singh                                                       ....Petitioner.





                      Versus
    State of HP and another                                               ... Respondents.





    ................................................................................................
    Coram

    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1

    For the petitioner.

    For respondents
                         r               to   : Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate.

                                              : M/s. Dinesh Thakur & Sanjeev Sood,
                                                Additional Advocate Generals with M/s.

                                                R. P. Singh & Amit Kumar Dhumal
                                                Dy. Advocate Generals for respondent
                                                No.1.
                                                None for respondent No. 2.


    Ajay Mohan Goel, J (Oral)

By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the code of Criminal Procedure, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

"It is, therefore, prayed that in the interest of justice petition may be allowed and proceedings in Criminal Case No, 1-II/2012 (filing No. 020207001194 2011) pursuant to FIR No,. 204/2011 dated 14.6.2011 lodged at Police Station Indora District Kangra (HP) now pending in Criminal Appeal No. 16-1/X 2015 (Fling No. Criminal Appeal No. 10001679/2015) (CNR HPKA 01003975 2015) in the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge-I Kangra at Dharamshala may be ordered to be quashed and set aside.

Any other order that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of petitioner against the respondents."

2. Pursuant to filing of FIR No. 204/2011 dated 14.6.2011 at Police Station Indora, Disrict Kangra under Sections 341, 324 and 506 of 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 12/03/2019 21:59:53 :::HCHP 2

IPC, the present petitioner stood convicted by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Indora in Criminal Case No.1-II/2002 dated .

9.10.2015 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 324 and 506 of IPC. It is also a matter of record that the appeal preferred by present petitioner against the judgment of conviction is pending disposal before the learned appellate court and sentence stands suspended. As per the petitioner, thereafter a compromise stands entered into between him and the complainant, copy whereof is appended with this petition as Annexure P-3. Accordingly, in lieu of the same, this petition has been filed with the prayer that as the dispute which resulted in lodging of the above mentioned FIR which led to the conviction of the petitioner stands amicably settled between the complainant and petitioner, this petition be allowed and FIR be quashed along with the judgment of conviction so passed on the basis of same by the learned trial court.

3. On 10.1.2019, statement of the present petitioner as also the complainant stands recorded by this Court. A perusal of the statement made by complainant demonstrates that he has stated therein that as the petitioner is a resident of his village who after realizing his mistake has apologized to the complainant, he (complainant) has decided to forgive him, to maintain cordial relations and was not interested in pursuing the case lodged by him and he had no objection in case FIR lodged by him stood quashed so also the conviction based upon the said FIR.

::: Downloaded on - 12/03/2019 21:59:53 :::HCHP 3

4. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the fine which stands deposited by the petitioner be not released in his favour.

5 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the records of the case, this Court is of the view that taking into consideration the fact that the complainant has already entered into a compromise with the petitioner and he is no more interested in pursuing the case which stood lodged by him against the accused and further the fact that as the parties being residents of the same village have decided to bury their differences and want to live together as good neighbours, this is a fit case wherein this Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should quash the said FIR as also the conviction passed on the basis of said FIR. Ordered accordingly. The fine amount which stood deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the judgment passed by the learned trial court shall remain deposited with the State as compensation, but non-

release of the same shall not be treaded as stigma against the petitioner.

Resultantly FIR No 204/2011 dated 14.6.2011 at Police Station Indora, District Kangra under Sections 341, 324 and 506 IPC, as also the conviction passed by the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1 st Class, Indora in Criminal Case No. 1-II/2012 dated 9.10.2015 are quashed and set aside.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge 11th March, 2019.

(Guleria) ::: Downloaded on - 12/03/2019 21:59:53 :::HCHP

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court