Himachal Pradesh High Court
CRMMO/622/2025 on 16 October 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
_______________ Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CrMMO No. 622 of 2025
Reserved on: 06.10.2026
Date of Decision:16 .10. 2026.
Krishan & others
....Petitioners
Versus
State of H.P. & others.
....Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No.
For the petitioners : Mr Dheeraj Kumar Verma, Advocate. For the respondents
:
: Mr Ajit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.1/State. Ms Shine Sehgal, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 to 6.
Rakesh Kainthla, Judge
The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 229 of 2020, dated 03.12.2020, registered at
Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, District, Kangra, H.P. for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 452, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the consequential proceedings arising out of it based on a compromise between the parties.
2. It has been asserted that the parties have entered into a compromise with the intervention of the respectable persons of the society. The respondents no. 2 to 6 have forgiven the petitioners and agreed not to pursue the matter after the compromise; no fruitful purpose would be served by continuing with the proceedings. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the FIR and consequential proceedings arising out of it be quashed.
3. The statements of the informant-Sonu, injured Shammi, Shambu, Sanju and Sagar were recorded on 20.03.2026 and 21.08.2026, in which they stated that they had entered into a compromise with the petitioners voluntarily and they had no objection to quashing the FIR based on a compromise between the parties.
4. The offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 of the IPC are compoundable under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Section 320(3) of CrPC provides that when the offences are compoundable, and a person is liable, by virtue of Section 149, the offence may be compounded. Therefore, the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of the IPC can be quashed based on a compromise between the parties.
5. This Court has already quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 147 and 148 of IPC in Sivo Devi vs others vs State of HP 2023 (2), Shimla Law Cases 949, Umesh Kumar vs State Kumar HP 2022 STPL 10721, Satish Kumar State of H.P. 2022 STPL 10703, Inderjeet vs State of H.P. 2022(2) Himachal Law Reporter 1217 and Subhash Verma vs State of H.P. 2021
(3) Shimla Law Cases 1146.
6. This Court has also quashed the FIR registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC in Ram Krishan alias Ramu vs. State of H.P.& others Latest HLJ 2021(2)(HP) 1327, Amir Hussain vs State of Himachal Pradesh 2022(1)Him.L.R.195, Braham Dass & others vs. State of H.P & others
2022(1) Him.L.R.466, Inderjeet Singh & others vs State of H.P. & others 2022(2)Him.LR.1217, Raj Kumar @ Raj & Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Latest HLJ 2022(HP)(1) 759 and Rukam Deen Vs State of Himachal Pradesh 2023(1) Him. L.R. (HC) 616 based on compromise between the parties.
7. This Court has already held in Ram Kumar & others vs. State of H.P. 2016(4) Him. L.R. 2157, Naresh Katoch vs. State of H.P. & another 2019 (Suppl.) Him L.R. 2656, Kartik Sharma & others vs. State of H.P. 2020 STPL 4914 H P and Naykan Kamdak & others vs. State of H.P. 2020 STPL 6334 HP that the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC can be quashed because of the compromise effected between the parties. The sole judgment to the contrary in Kishore Kumar alias Kishore Vs. State of H.P. 2013 (3) Shimla Law Case 1220, taking a contrary view, is deemed to have been overruled as per the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court.
9. This Court has already quashed the FIR registered for the commission of offence punishable under Section 452 in Prashant Dharmani & others vs. State of H.P. & others 2023(1) Him.L.R.241, Ameen vs State of H.P. & others 2023(1) Him L.R.375, Avinash Singh Rana vs State of H.P. & others 023 STPL 3181 H.P and
Chaman Lal vs State of H.P.Latest HLJ 2023(HP)(1)213 based on compromise. These judgments are binding on this Court.
10. In view of these precedents, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 229 of 2020, dated 03.12.2020, registered at Police Station Nagrota Bagwan, District, Kangra, H.P. for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 452, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326, 504 and 506 of IPC and the consequential proceedings arising out of the said F.I.R. are also ordered to be quashed.
11. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending applications, if any.
12. Parties are permitted to produce a copy of this judgment, downloaded from the webpage of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, before the authorities concerned, and the said authorities shall not insist on the production of a certified copy but, if required, may verify passing of the order from the website of the High Court.
(Rakesh Kainthla)
Judge
16th October, 2026
(Ravinder)