Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Ravi Kumar vs State Of H.P. And Anr on 31 July, 2024

Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:6108 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No 514 of 2024.

.

Reserved on: 25.07.2024.

Date of Decision: 31.07.2024.

           Ravi Kumar                                                                         ...Petitioner
                                                     Versus

           State of H.P. and Anr.                                                         ...Respondents


           Coram

Hon'ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, Additional Advocate General for respondent No.1/State.

Mr. Vikrant Chandel, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 265 of 2021, dated 15.07.2021, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 181 and 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act) at Police Station Sadar, Una District Una, H.P. and the consequent proceedings arising out of the FIR.

1

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

::: Downloaded on - 01/08/2024 03:09:45 :::CIS

Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:6108 )

2. It has been asserted that the parties have amicably settled the matter with the intervention of friends. No fruitful .

purpose would be served by keeping the FIR pending. The continuation of the proceedings will result in a bitter relationship between the parties, whereas compromise will bring peace and harmony; therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the FIR be quashed.

3. The statements of the informant Pramod Singh and injured Prem Lata were recorded on 25.06.2024 in which they stated that they had entered into a compromise with the accused voluntarily. Compromise deed, Annexure P-2, bears their signatures and they have no objection in case the FIR is ordered to be quashed as per the compromise.

4. I have heard Mr Atul Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.1/State and Mr Vikrant Chandel, learned counsel for respondents No.2 & 3.

5. Mr. Atul Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the parties have settled their difference voluntarily and they have executed the compromise deed. They have no objection in case the FIR is ordered to be quashed based on the ::: Downloaded on - 01/08/2024 03:09:45 :::CIS Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:6108 ) compromise. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the FIR be quashed to maintain harmony between the parties.

.

6. Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent No. 1/State submitted that the offence involves the society and is not a private dispute. Therefore, the FIR should not be quashed.

7. Mr. Vikrant Chandel, learned counsel for respondents No. 2 and 3 adopted the submissions of Mr. Atul Kumar learned counsel for the petitioner and prayed that the FIR be quashed.

8. This Court had quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of IPC and Section 181 and 196 of MV Act in Sushant vs. State of H.P. 2023 HLC 531, Vikas Huda vs. State of H.P. 2023 STPL 3009, Kulwinder Singh vs. Ankush Kumar 2023 HLR384 and Nishant vs. State 2022 Suppl. Law Cases 45 and others based on compromise. These judgments are binding on this Court.

9. Therefore, in view of these precedents, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 265 of 2021, dated 15.07.2021, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of IPC and Sections 181 and 196 of MV Act at Police Station Sadar, Una District Una, H.P. is quashed.

::: Downloaded on - 01/08/2024 03:09:45 :::CIS

Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:6108 ) Consequent upon the quashing of FIR, criminal proceedings pending/initiated against the petitioner-accused in pursuance .

thereto, are also quashed.

10. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any.

11. Parties are permitted to produce a copy of this judgment, downloaded from the webpage of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh before the authorities concerned, and the said authorities shall not insist on the production of a certified copy but if required, may verify passing of the order from Website of the High Court.

(Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 31st July, 2024 (Nikita) ::: Downloaded on - 01/08/2024 03:09:45 :::CIS