Point of Law: High Court, as case may be, after having given due regard to nature of offence and fact that victim/complainant has willingly entered into a settlement/compromise, can quash proceedings in exercise of their respective constitutional/inherent powers.

ORDER :

1. By way of instant petition filed under S. 482 Cr.P.C. prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of FIR No. 125, dated 13.9.2010 under Ss. 147, 427, 447, 451, 506 and 149 IPC registered at Police Station Baddi, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh and also for quashing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 3.8.2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 2, Nalagarh in Cr. Case No. 78/2 of 2012 titled State vs. Amrit Lal, on the basis of compromise arrived inter se parties.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record, are that the FIR as detailed herein above, came to be lodged at the behest of one Mahesh Arora, Chief Executive of respondent No. 2, whereby he alleged that the land comprised in Khasra No. 113 measuring 21 Bigha 5 Biswa situated in Village Bhatoli Khurd, Pargana and Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh was purchased by respondent No. 2 i.e. Vardhman Textiles Ltd. from one Shri Rallu for consideration on 29.6.1994. Complainant alleged that after payment of total amount of consideration, company took possession of the land in question and set up a structure for the purpose of posting security of the company. Complainant further alleged that since 31.3.1995, the company is in possession of the land, for all intents and purposes but on 12.9.2010 at 12.20 pm, petitioners-accused, armed with dangerous weapons, came on the spot and uprooted the wall with the help of a JCB machine. He alleged that when the said persons were deterred by the Security personnel of the company, they fled from the spot, but while leaving, extended threats to the security guard that in case they interfere in the matter, they will be run over and killed by JCB machine. On the basis of aforesaid complaint made by the aforesaid representative of the company FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings, came to be lodged against the petitioner.

3. After completion of investigation police presented Challan in the competent court of law i.e. learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Nalagarh, who on the basis of the evidence led on record by the prosecution, held the accused guilty of having committed offences punishable under Ss. 147, 447, 451, 427, 506 and 149 IPC and convicted and sentenced them as under:

4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with judgment of conviction recorded by learned trial Court, accused approached learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh, where an appeal is stated to be pending, but before the same could be decided finally, petitioners and respondent No. 2 entered into compromise, whereby, both the parties have resolved to settle their dispute inter se them amicably. In the aforesaid background, petitioners have approached this court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for quashing of FIR as also the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class.

5. Vide order dated 10.8.2022, this court. while directing respondent- State to ascertain the factum of compromise, if any, arrived inter se parties, also deemed it necessary to summon the parties, especially respondent No. 2, at those instance, FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings came to be registered. Though instructions of respond