Himachal Pradesh High Court
Office Dharna vs Shubham on 9 November, 2022
Author: Satyen Vaidya
Bench: Satyen Vaidya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
.
ON THE 9th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA
CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) U/S 482 Cr.P.C No. 951 of 2022
Between:
SHUBHAM KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 21
YEARS, SON OF SHRI KAPOOR CHAND,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALYAR, POST
OFFICE DHARNA, TEHSIL KHUNDIAN,
DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.
.....PETITIONER
( BY MR. AASHEESH PATIAL, ADVOCATE )
AND
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH.
2. SHRI VARUN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 28
YEARS, SON OF SHRI RANJEET SINGH,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PAROL, POST
OFFICE DERA PAROL, TEHSIL BHORANJ,
DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P.
........RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. NARENDER THAKUR, DEPUTY
ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR R-1 ;
MS. DHANWANTI, ADVOCATE, FOR R-2)
::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:32:05 :::CIS
2
This petition coming on for orders this day, the
.
Court passed the following:-
ORDER
By way of this petition, a prayer has been made to quash FIR No 58/2021, dated 06.04.2021, under Sections 279 and 337 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Bhoranj, District Hamirpur, H.P. and consequent proceedings pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class-II, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P., titled as State vs. Shubham Kumar.
2. It is averred in the petition that accident in question was not on account of any rash or negligent Act of the petitioner but was a pure chance. It is further submitted that the parties have compromised the matter with each other as they were known to each other even before the date of accident. In order to maintain peace and harmony, a written compromise has been executed between them, which has been placed on record as Annexure P-2.
3. Petitioner and respondent No. 2 are present in the Court today. Their separate statements on oath have been ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:32:05 :::CIS 3 recorded. Both have reiterated the facts narrated in the petition.
.
They have identified their signatures on compromise deed, Annexure P-2, whereby, they have settled their disputes with the intervention of common friends and respectable persons of the society. In view of the compromise, respondent No. 2 has decided to withdraw from prosecution of the petitioner.
4. The terms of the compromise deed, Annexure P-2 have been perused, they are found to be lawful.
5. The injury caused to respondent No. 2-complainant as a result of the accident in question was personal to him. Now, he has entered into a compromise with the petitioner. Both the parties have categorically stated, on oath, that compromise has been effected by intervention of common friends and respectable persons of the society. They have also mentioned that the intent to have amicable settlement is bonafide. They want to live in peace in future.
6. Keeping in view the nature of offences involved in the case, allowance of the prayer made in the petition will not be prejudicial to the interest of society at large. The objective of every civilized society as also the legal system is to secure peace ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:32:05 :::CIS 4 and harmony in the society. The prayer, as made in the petition, if .
allowed, will definitely serve the aforesaid objective.
7. In light of above discussion, the instant petition is allowed. FIR No 58/2021, dated 06.04.2021, under Sections 279 and 337 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station r to Bhoranj, District Hamirpur, H.P. and consequent proceedings pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class-II, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P., titled as State vs. Shubham Kumar, are ordered to be quashed.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
( Satyen Vaidya ) Judge November 9, 2022 (sushma) ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:32:05 :::CIS