Hans Raj vs Hans Raj on 28 September, 2022

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Hans Raj vs Hans Raj on 28 September, 2022

Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

                                       1


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

                  ON THE 28th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022




                                                            .

                                 BEFORE

            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL





                   CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) U/S 482 CRPC
                   No. 853 of 2022

     Between:-





     HANS RAJ, S/O SH. RATTAN
     LAL, R/O VILL. BEHLI, P.O.
     SIKROHA, TEHSIL SADAR,
     DISTT. BILASPUR, H.P., AGED
     ABOUT 36 YEARS.

                                       ...PETITIONERS

     (BY SHRI ASHWANI KAUNDAL, ADVOCATE)

     AND


1.   STATE OF H.P. THROUGH
     SECRETARY (HOME), SHIMLA,
     H.P.




2.   SMT. BAGGO DEVI, W/O HANS
     RAJ, R/O VILL. BEHLI, P.O.





     SIKROHA,   TEHSIL   SADAR,
     DISTT. BILASPUR, H.P. AGED
     ABOUT 32 YEARS.





                                     ...RESPONDENTS
     (M/S SUMESH RAJ, DINESH THAKUR &
     SANJEEV SOOD, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE
     GENERALS, WITH MR. AMIT DHUMAL,
     DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL, FOR R-1.
     SHRI RAHUL THAKUR, ADVOCATE, FOR R-
     2.
     PARTIES ARE PRESENT IN PERSON.
     Whether approved for reporting?
__________________________________________________________




                                           ::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2022 20:04:22 :::CIS
                                           2


                 This petition coming on for admission this day, the Court passed the
following:-




                                                                         .
                                     JUDGMENT

By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of FIR No. 04/2018, dated 26.03.2018, registered under Sections 498-A, 325, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code at Women Police Station Sadar, District Bilaspur, H.P. as well as ensuing criminal proceedings pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P. in Case No. 72/2 of 2018, titled as State Vs. Hans Raj.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and learned Additional Advocate General.

3. Respondent No. 2, Smt. Baggo Devi, who is present in person in the Court, has been duly identified by her counsel Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate. Her statement has also been independently recorded in the Court, wherein she has stated that she has entered into a compromise with the accused and she is not interested in pursuing the matter which led to registration of FIR No. 04/2018, dated 26.03.2018, registered under Sections 498-A, 325, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code at Women Police Station Sadar, District Bilaspur, H.P. as well as ensuing criminal proceedings pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P. in Case No. 72/2 of 2018, titled as State Vs. Hans Raj.

::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2022 20:04:22 :::CIS 3

Copy of compromise deed so arrived at between the parties is appended with the petition as Annexure P-2 and execution of the same as also the .

contents thereof have also been acknowledged by respondent No. 2.

4. Learned Additional Advocate General has also very fairly submitted that the respondent-State has no objection in case petition is allowed and FIR in issue as well as ensuing criminal proceedings are quashed and set aside.

5. Accordingly, in view of the above, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 04/2018, dated 26.03.2018, registered under Sections 498-A, 325, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code at Women Police Station Sadar, District Bilaspur, H.P. as well as ensuing criminal proceedings pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P. in Case No. 72/2 of 2018, titled as State Vs. Hans Raj are quashed and set aside, taking into consideration the compromise entered between the complainant and accused and a statement to this effect, made by respondent No. 2 in this Court. The compromise deed Annexure P-2 as well as statement of the complainant made today in the Court shall form part of the judgment.

Petition stands disposed of, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge September 28, 2022 (bhupender) ::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2022 20:04:22 :::CIS

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court