Himachal Pradesh High Court
CRMMO/984/2026 on 5 November 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 984 of 2026 Reserved on: 26.10.2026 Date of Decision: 05.11.2026. Ankit Jamwal & ors. …. Petitioners Versus State of HP & Anr. …. Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioners : Mr Abhishek Daulta, Advocate, vice Mr Vishal Verma, Advocate. For Respondent No.1-State : Mr Tarun Pathak, Deputy
Advocate General. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr Hitender Thakur, Advocate. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No. 238 of 2016, dated 02.10.2016, registered at Police Station Shimla West, District Shimla, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, and 341 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), based on a compromise arrived at between the parties.
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
2. It has been asserted that the matter has been compromised between the parties with the intervention of friends, elders, relatives, and respectable persons of the society. The informant/victim does not want to proceed further with the matter after the compromise. Hence, the present petition.
3. The statement of the informant/victim, Vijay Singh, was recorded on 15.09.2026, wherein he stated that he had reported the matter to the police and had sustained injuries in the incident. He had compromised the matter with the accused voluntarily, without any influence or coercion from any person. He does not want to proceed further with the matter after the compromise and has no objection to the quashing of the FIR based on the compromise arrived at between the parties.
4. Heard.
5. The offences punishable under Sections 323 and 341 of the IPC are compoundable under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). Section 320(3) of the Cr.P.C. provides that when an offence is compoundable under this section, the abetment of such offence, or an attempt to commit such offence (when such attempt is itself an offence), or where the accused is liable under Section 149 of the IPC, may likewise be compounded. Hence, the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, and 149 of the IPC can be quashed based on the compromise between the parties.
6. This Court has quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 147 and 148 of the IPC, inter alia 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 based on compromise. These judgments are binding on this Court.
7. In view of these binding precedents, the present petition is allowed, and FIR No. 238 of 2016, dated 02.10.2016, registered at Police Station Shimla West, District Shimla, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, and 341 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR are ordered to be quashed.
8. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any.
9. 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 the passing of the order from the Website of the High Court.
(Rakesh Kainthla)
Judge 5th November, 2026 (Chander)