Allowed

Vivek Kumar and Anr. v. State of Hp and Ors.

Himachal Pradesh HC13 Jun 2022CRMMO/313/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed two criminal writ petitions seeking quashing of cross FIRs registered between petitioners and respondents. The court held that since the dispute leading to registration stood amicably settled with a compromise admitted by parties, the FIRs and ensuing proceedings are quashed and set aside.

What did the court decide?

FIRs No. 82 and 83 of 2020 and the ensuing criminal proceedings were quashed and set aside.

Vivek Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Hp and Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Himachal Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA ON THE 13^th DAY OF JUNE, 2022 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) U/S 482 CRPC No. 313 & 314 OF 2022

¶2

Cr.MMO No. 313 of 2022 Between:

¶3

1. VIVEK KUMAR, S/O SH. PUSHPINDER KUMAR, R/O VILLAGE DHAMANDER, P.O. LUHAR, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P. 2. PUSHPINDER KUMAR, S/O SH. BISHAMBER DASS, R/O VILLAGE DHAMANDER, P.O. LUHAR, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P.

¶4

….PETITIONERS.

¶5

(BY MR. KULWANT SINGH GILL, ADVOCATE) AND 1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH SECRETARY HOME. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER NADAUN, H.P. 3. SOHAN LAL, S/O SH. GIRDHARI LAL, R/O VILLAGE DHAMANDER, P.O. LUHAR, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P. 4. RAJEEV KUMAR, S/O SH. GIRDHARI LAL, R/O VILLAGE DHAMANDER, P.O. LUHAR, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P.

¶6

….RESPONDENTS.

¶7

¶8

(BY M/S DINESH THAKUR, SUMESH RAJ AND SANJEEV SOOD, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATES GENERAL, FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 & 2.

¶9

MR. ASHUTOSH BHARDWAJ, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.3 AND 4)

¶10

Cr.MMO No. 314 of 2022 Between:

¶11

1. GIRDHARI LA,, S/O SH. DURGA DASS, R/O VILLAGE DHAMANDER, P.O. LUHAR, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P. 2. RANI BAI, W/O SH. GIRDHARI LAL, R/O VILLAGE DHAMANDER, P.O. LUHAR, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P. 3. NARESH KUMAR, S/O SH. GIRDHARI LAL, R/O VILLAGE DHAMANDER, P.O. LUHAR, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P. 4. SOHAN LAL, S/O SH. GIRDHARI LAL, R/O VILLAGE DHAMANDER, P.O. LUHAR, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P.

¶12

5. RAJEEV KUMAR, S/O SH. GIRDHARI LAL, R/O VILLAGE DHAMANDER, P.O. LUHAR, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P.

¶13

….PETITIONERS.

¶14

(BY MR. KULWANT SINGH GILL, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND

¶16

1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH

¶17

¶18

SECRETARY HOME.

¶19

2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER NADAUN, H.P.

¶20

3. VIVEK KUMAR, S/O SH. PUSHPINDER KUMAR, R/O VILLAGE DHAMANDER, P.O. LUHAR, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR, H.P.

¶21

...RESPONDENTS.

¶22

(BY M/S DINESH THAKUR, SUMESH RAJ & SANJEEV SOOD, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATES GENERAL FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 & 2.

¶23

MR. ASHUTOSH BHARDWAJ, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.3)

¶24

Whether approved for reporting ?¹ No

¶25

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

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

Both these petitions are being disposed of by a common order as the parties therein have prayed for quashing of the cross FIRs which stood registered by them against each other on the ground that the issue which led to the registration of the FIRs in issue now stands amicably settled between them. FIR No.82 of 2020, dated 23.06.2020, under Sections 147, 149, 323 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Nadaun, District Hamirpur, H.P., has been registered at the behest of Sh. Vivek Kumar, whereas, FIR No.83 of 2020, dated 23.06.2020, under Sections 323, 325, 504 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Nadaun, District Hamirpur,

¶28

¶29

¶30

H.P., has been registered at the behest of S/Sh. Sohan Lal and Rajeev Kumar. Their statements have been separately recorded in the Court today, wherein, they have deposed that the difference which led to the registration of the FIRs now stands amicably sorted out between them. To this effect, they have also entered into a compromise, copies whereof have been appended with both the petitions as Annexure P-2, respectively. The execution and contents whereof have been admitted to be correct by the parties concerned. It is in this background that a prayer has been made for quashing of aforesaid FIRs as also the ensuing criminal proceedings so that the parties can now live in peace and harmony with each other.

¶31

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the respondents and learned Additional Advocate General representing the State.

¶32

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in these petitions as well as taking into consideration the statements of Sh. Vivek Kumar and S/Sh. Sohan Lal and Rajeev Kumar, which stand recorded in the Court today, these petitions are allowed and FIR No.82 of 2020, dated 23.06.2020, under Sections 147, 149, 323 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Nadaun, District Hamirpur, H.P., registered at the behest of Sh. Vivek Kumar, whereas, FIR No.83 of 2020, dated 23.06.2020, under Sections 323, 325, 504 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Nadaun, District Hamirpur, H.P., registered at

¶33

¶34

the behest of S/Sh. Sohan Lal & Rajeev Kumar, are quashed and

¶35

set aside, so also the ensuing criminal proceedings.

¶36

Petitions stand disposed of, so also pending

¶37

miscellaneous application, if any.

¶38

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

¶39

June 13, 2022 (vinod)

Vivek Kumar and Anr. v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Kumar and Anr. v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Chand Now Deceased through Lrs Rakesh Chand Vs Kartar Singh

Ranbir Singh Vs Sandeep Managing Director of Hrtc and Others

Ravi Dutt Vs Nisha Singh and Ors.

Akashdeep Singh Vs Administrator, the Mandi Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Ravinder Kumar Vs Ishwar Dass

Ram Saran Vs Hrtc