Allowed

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

Himachal Pradesh HC5 Jan 2024CRMMO/1045/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed FIR No. 244 of 2021 and resultant proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petitioners and respondents were students involved in a misunderstanding that led to cross-FIRs. With mutual compromise between parties and due consideration of the petitioners' career status, the court granted the petition.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 244 of 2021 dated 27.10.2021 and proceedings resultant thereto were ordered to be quashed.

Anil Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

¶2

Cr.MMO No. 1045 of 2023

¶3

Decided on: 5^th January, 2024

¶4

Anil Kumar and others

¶5

.......Petitioners.

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of H.P and another

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

Coram

¶10

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

¶11

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶12

For the petitioners: Mr. Karan Kapoor and Mr. Nishant Kaistha, Advocate.

¶13

For the respondents: Ms. Leena Guleria, Addl. A.G. for respondent No.1. Mr. Dikken Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶14

Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)

¶15

Petitioners have filed the present petition, under

¶16

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Cr.P.C.’), with a prayer to quash FIR No. 244 of 2021 dated 27.10.2021 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR in question’), under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), registered with Police Station, West, District Shimla H.P., as well as, proceedings resultant thereto, which are stated to be

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned trial Court), on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

¶20

According to the petitioners, due to misunderstanding, respondent No.2 had lodged the FIR in question, in which, the police has investigated the matter and submitted the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, which is pending adjudication before the learned trial Court.

¶21

It is their further case that they are students and in order to maintain their future cordial relations, the matter has been compromised with respondent No.2. The terms and conditions of the compromise have been reduced into writing. 3. It is also pertinent to mention here that at the instance of petitioner No.2 namely, Sahil Thakur, FIR No. 245 of 2021 with Police Station West, District Shimla, H.P has been registered against respondent No.2, as well as, eight others. In the said case also, the police has investigated the matter and submitted the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, which is pending adjudication before the learned trial Court.

¶22

¶23

As per statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, quashing of the said FIR on the basis of compromise has also been sought in Cr.MMO No. 1057 of 2023.

¶24

On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the petition, as prayed for.

¶25

When put to notice, respondent-State, has filed the status report, disclosing therein, about the manner, in which, the FIR in question has been lodged by respondent No.2 and the police has investigated the matter and submitted the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, which is pending before the learned trial Court.

¶26

The person who has put the criminal into motion, has been impleaded, in the present petition, as respondent No.2.

¶27

Respondent No.2, Ritik Palsra, when appeared before this Court, has stated, on oath, in the opening line of his statement that in the year 2021, he was the student in Government College, Kotshera, however, due to misunderstanding, he had lodged the FIR in question against the petitioners. He has also reiterated the fact that, at the instance of petitioner No.2, FIR No. 245 of 2021 with Police

¶28

¶29

Station West, District Shimla, H.P has also been registered against him, as well as, eight others. He has further deposed that the police has investigated both the matters and submitted report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, which is pending adjudication before the learned trial Court. He has further asserted the fact that since he and petitioners are students, as such, in order to maintain their future cordial relations, with the intervention of their seniors, the matter has been compromised vide compromise Annexure P-2. Not only this, he has also stated that the matter has been compromised regarding the present FIR, as well as, FIR No. 245 of 2021.

¶30

On the basis of said compromise, he has deposed that he has no objection if the present petition is allowed as prayed for.

¶31

The petitioners, in their joint statement have also asserted the factual position with regard to registration of cross FIRs, as well as, investigation in both the cases by the police and submission of report under Section 173(2) Cr.PC., which according to them, are pending adjudication before the learned trial Court. They have also asserted the fact with regard to compromise, which has been effected between the

¶32

¶33

parties. They have also stated that since they all are students, as such, with the intervention of their seniors, the matter has been compromised vide compromise Annexure P-2.

¶34

On the basis of above facts, they have prayed that petition may kindly be allowed, in view of the compromise Annexure P-2.

¶35

Heard.

¶36

The petitioners are at the threshold of their career and at the relevant time, they were students, however, due to misunderstanding, FIR in question has been lodged against them by respondent No.2. Not only this, as per stand taken by the petitioners, as well as, respondent No.2, cross case has been registered against respondent No.2 and his companions. The said case is also stated to be pending adjudication before the learned trial Court. Now, according to stand taken by them, with the intervention of their seniors, the matter has been compromised vide compromise Annexure P-2.

¶37

The primary purpose of law is to maintain peace and harmony in the society.

¶38

¶39

Keeping in view the age of the petitioners, as well as, considering the fact that they are at the threshold of their career and in case, they are forced to attend the criminal proceedings before the learned trial Court, it would certainly affect upon their career. When, the parties have buried their inter se disputes and decided to live peacefully in order to maintain their future cordial relations, then, their efforts must be acknowledged by the Court.

¶40

Considering all these facts, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 244 of 2021 dated 27.10.2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324 and 504 of IPC, registered with Police Station, West, District Shimla H.P., as well as, proceedings resultant thereto, which are stated to be pending in the learned trial Court, are ordered to be quashed.

¶41

The compromise deed, as well as, statements of the parties, recorded today shall form part of this order.

¶42

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed

¶43

of.

¶44

January 05, 2024 ( Virender Singh ) (naveen) Judge

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tanishka and Another (Minor through Their Mother Poonam Kumari) Vs Ajit Singh

Ajit Singh Vs Tanishka and Anr.

Chinta Mani Vs State of Hp and Another

The Land Acquisition Officercollector Vs Mehar Chand

Jaram Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

Ritik Palsra and Others Vs State of Hp and Another