115(2), 118 (1) and 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS’) w.ith Police Station, Barsar, District Hamirpur, H.P., as well as, the proceedings resultant thHereto, stated to be pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barsar, District Hamirpur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’).

2. Brief facts, leading to filing of the present petition, may be summed up, as under:

On 31.7.2025, Police of Police Station, Barsar, Hamirpur received an information, qua a qua rrel having been taken place, between the petitioner and one Sunila Kumari. Thereafter, on the statement of respondent No. 2, FIR has been registered. In the statement of respondent No. 2, she has levelled allegations, qua the petitioner (her husband) that he used to beat her and treat her with cruelty.

3. After registration of the FIR, Police has investigated the matter. On the basis of medical report, Section 118(1) of the BNS was added, in this case. Since, the petitioner had not disclosed abo.ut the weapon of offence, as such, Section 238 of the BNS was also added, in this case. H

4. Thereafter, charge-sheet has been filed, before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barsar, District Hamirpur, H.P. On 8.3.2025, the matter was listed before the National Lok Adalat, Barsar, District Hamirpur, H.P., and the petitioner has been acquitted from the offences, punishable under Sections 123(2), 115(2), 118(1) and 238 of the BN S.

5. The said order has been assailed by State of H.P., before this Court, by way of Cr. MMO No. 772 of 2025, titled as, ‘State of H.P. versus Banku Ram’, which stands allowed, by this Court, today.

6. In view of the fact that vide judgment of even date, passed in Cr. MMO No. 772 of 2025, it has been held that offences, punishable under Sections 118(1) and 238 of BNS could not be compounded, before the Lok Adalat, as such, FIR, qua these offences, as well as, proceedings resultant there.to, with regard to the aforesaid offences, have been revived, by this Court. As such, preseHnt petition has been filed to quash the FIR, qua offences, under Sections 118(1) and 238 of the BNS.

7. Respondent No. 2, who, at one point of time, had levelled the allegations, against the petitioner, when, appeared before this Court, today, has not only reiterated the factual position,with regard to lodging of the FIR, which resulted into the pro ceedings, pending before the learned trial Court, but, categorically stated that she is residing happily with the petitioner, in her matrimonial home, and she has no objection, in case, the present petition is allowed, by quashing the FIR in question, as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto.

8. Similar type of statement has also been made by the petitioner.

9. Heard.

10. The primary purpose of law is to maintain peace in the society and when, the parties to the lis, i.e. petitioner and respondent No. 2, are not strangers, but husband and wife, who, compelled by the circumstances, had an altercation with each other, and now, have buried their disputes afnd compromised the matter, then, the continuation of the criminal proceedings, arising out of FIR in question, lodged by respondent No. 2, would certainly amount to abuse of the process of law.

11. Although, on the basis of good sense, which has prevailed upon them, the offences have been compounded before the National Lok Adalat on 8.3.2025, however, offences under Sections 118(1) and 238 of BNS could not be compounded, as these are non- compoundable offences. As such, State of H.P., has assailed the award, passed by the National Lok Adalat, before this Court, by way of Cr. MMO No. 772 of 2025, titled as, ‘State of H.P. versus Banku Ram’, which has been allowed, vide judgment of even date, passed in the said petition. As such, the proceedings resultant to the FIR in question, qua the offences, punishable under Sections 118(1) and 238 of BNS, have revived.

12. The compromise, Ext. PX has been filed in