Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 993

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Jaswinder Singh & Another - Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & Others - Respondents
Cr.MMO No.1313 of 2024
Decided on : 02-01-2025

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Ashok K. Tyagi & Ms.Divya Rajta, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Mr. Rohit Sharma, Mr. A.K. Sharma, Advocate

Quashing criminal proceedings is justified when parties have reached a compromise, promoting harmony and preventing abuse of legal process.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 528 - Indian Penal Code - Sections 498-A and 506 - Quashing of FIR - Petitioners sought to quash FIR No.260/2019 based on a compromise with the respondent - The Court recognized the importance of maintaining harmony and the sincerity of the parties’ reconciliatory efforts. (Paras 1, 16, 19)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Abuse of Process - Continuing criminal proceedings despite a compromise would constitute an abuse of the process of law and adversely affect the parties' family life. (Paras 17, 19)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, husband and wife, had a matrimonial discord leading to the registration of an FIR for alleged offenses under the IPC, which they sought to quash based on their reconciliation and written compromise. (Paras 1-5)

Findings of Court:
The Court found that allowing the petition would not only conserve judicial time but also preserve the familial relationship between the parties. (Para 18)

Issues: Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the compromise between the parties. (Paras 5, 19)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the need to avoid perpetuating legal disputes that undermine family stability when reconciliation has been achieved. (Paras 17, 19)

Result: Petition allowed; FIR No.260/2019 and proceedings quashed.

Table of Content
1. filing of fir and matrimonial discord (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 8 , 9)
2. basis of quashing fir due to compromise (Para 2 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 10 , 11)
3. recognition of settlement to maintain harmony (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 18)
4. formalization of compromise terms (Para 15)
5. order to quash fir and related proceedings (Para 19 , 20 , 21)

JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, J.

Petitioners have filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ BNSS ’), for quashing of FIR No.260/2019, dated 14.08.2019 (hereinafter referred to as the FIR, in question), registered with Police Station, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P., under Sections 498-A and 506 read with Section 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, which are stated to be pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’).

2. The relief of quashing has been sought, on the basis of the compromise, which has taken place between the petitioners and respondent No.4.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that petitioner No.1 was married to respondent No.4, on 17.02.2017. Thereafter, they have been blessed with two sons. However, due to some matrimonial discord, between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.4, respondent No.4 had lodged FIR, in question, in which, the police has conducted the investigation and submitted the final report, which is pending adjudication before the learned trial Court.

4. It is the further case of the petitioners that during the pendency of the trial, the matter has been compromised vide compromise Annexure P-4 and respondent No.4, is now residing happily with the petitioner.

5. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to quash the FIR, in question, as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned trial Court, by allowing the petition.

6. When put to notice, respondents No.1 to 3 have filed the reply to the petition, mentioning therein the manner, in which, the FIR, in question, has been registered, at the instance of respondent No.4, as well as, the manner, in which, the police has conducted the investigation, in this case and submitted the final report, which is pending adjudication, before the learned trial Court.

7. The person, who, at one point of time, had put the criminal machinery into motion, by lodging the FIR, in question, by levelling allegations, as mentioned in it, now has settled the matter with the petitioner, vide compromise Annexure P-4.

8. Respondent No.4, while appearing before this Court, has deposed that she was married to petitioner No.1, on 17.02.2017. Thereafter, she and petitioner No.1 have been blessed with two sons.

9. Respondent No.4 has further deposed that due to some misunderstanding, she had lodged FIR, in question, against the petitioners. After registration of the FIR, the police has conducted the investigation and submitted the final report, which is pending before the learned trial Court.

10. Respondent No.4, has further deposed that now, during the pendency of the trial, the matter has been settled between her and the petitioners. Now, she is residing happily with the petitioners, in the matrimonial home. She has specifically stated that she has no objection, in case, the petition is allowed as prayed for.

11. Similar type of statement has also been made by the petitioners, on oath.

12. Heard.

13. The marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.4, is stated to have taken place on 17.02.2017 and both of them have also been blessed with two sons. However, compelled by the circumstances, it seems that due to some misunderstanding, respondent No.4, had lodged the FIR, in question, against the petitioner, in which, the police has conducted the investigation and submitted the final report, which is pending before the learned trial Court.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document