Rajeev Kumar and Another Vs State of Hp and Others

For the Petitioners : Petitioners in person with Mr. Pankaj Choudhri, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. H.S. Rawat and Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocates General for respondent No.1/State. Respondents No.2 to 5 in person with Mr. Dixit Sahotra, Advocate.

¶10

Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)

¶11

The petitioners have filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.N.S.S.’) for quashing of FIR No.101 of 2019, dated 08.10.2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the FIR in question’), registered under Sections 354, 504, 323 & 34 of IPC of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’) with Police Station, Kehloor, District Bilaspur, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned Chief

¶12

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

¶13

2( 2025:HHC:9724 )

¶14

Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’).

¶15

The relief of quashing has been sought on the basis of the compromise, effected between the parties.

¶16

According to the petitioners, on the statement of respondent No.2, the FIR, in question, has been registered against them.

¶17

After registration of the FIR, the police has conducted the investigation and submitted the final report, which is now pending adjudication, before the learned trial Court.

¶18

The terms and conditions of the compromise have been reduced into writing, which are annexed with the petition, as, Annexure P-2.

¶19

On the basis of the said compromise, a prayer has been made to allow the petition, as prayed for, by quashing of FIR No.101 of 2019, as well as, all the proceedings resultant thereto.

¶20

When put to notice, the respondent No.1-State has filed the status report, disclosing therein the manner, in which, the FIR, in question, has been registered and the manner, in which, the police has investigated the matter.

¶21

3( 2025:HHC:9724 )

¶22

The person, who, at one point of time, had levelled the allegations against the petitioners and has lodged the FIR, in question, appeared today, before this Court and made a statement, on oath, that due to misunderstanding, she had lodged FIR, in question, against the petitioners. She has deposed that with the intervention of the respectable persons of the society and in order to maintain cordial relations, the matter has now been compromised.

¶23

Similar type of statements have been made by the petitioners as well as respondents No. 3 & 4, on oath.

¶24

The respondent No.5, master Saksham had also sustained injuries in the said incident. Respondent No.3-Sewa Singh, being father of respondent No.5 has also made statement on his behalf.

¶25

Heard.

¶26

As per the stand taken by the parties, the dispute between them has now been settled. The terms and conditions of the compromise, have been placed on record as Annexure P-2.

¶27

The criminal machinery, in the present case, has been put into motion, by respondent No.2, by lodging the FIR, in question. However, as per the stand, taken by petitioners

¶28

4( 2025:HHC:9724 )

¶29

and respondent No.2, as well as, respondents No.3 to 5, they have compromised the matter, vide compromise, Annexure P- 2.

¶30

The terms and conditions, which have been agreed upon by the parties, in order to settle all the disputes, should be honoured by the Court, as no useful purpose would be achieved, by keeping the proceedings alive.

¶31

Acceptance of the compromise will also save the precious judicial time of the learned trial Court, as the learned trial Court will be in a position to devote such time for deciding some other serious disputes, pending before it.

¶32

Moreover, this Court is satisfied with the genuineness of the compromise, Annexure P-2, entered into between the parties, as, respondent No.2, while appearing before this Court has categorically stated that he was not under any pressure for entering into the compromise.

¶33

Considering all these facts, the petition is allowed and FIR No.101 of 2019, dated 08.10.2019, registered under Sections 354, 504, 323 & 34 of IPC with Police Station, Kehloor, District Bilaspur, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, are ordered to be quashed.

¶34

5( 2025:HHC:9724 )

¶35

The Compromise Deed, Annexure P-2, and the statements of the parties, recorded before this Court shall form part of the judgment.

¶36

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

¶37

also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶38

(Virender Singh) Judge

¶39

April 08, 2025 (subhash)

Rajeev Kumar and Another v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Kumar and Another v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pankaj Vs State of Hp and Another

Banita Devi Vs Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank

Rishi Sharma Vs Prince Thakur

Ramesh Sharma Vs State of Hp

Ram Karan Vs State of Hp

Chaman Lal Vs Allwyn Mine Chem Insutries