Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Aditya Kumar @ Adi Sah – Appellant
Versus
State of HP – Respondent
The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 237 of 2025 , dated 21.11. , registered at Police Station Sadar, District Solan, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act and consequential proceedings arising out of the said FIR based on the compromise effected between the parties.
2. It has been asserted that the FIR was lodged as a result of a misunderstanding. The petitioners did not intend to beat the respondent No. 2/informant. The petitioners had not used the weapon, and no case under the Arms Act was made out. Hence, the petition.
3. Mr Anirudh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the parties have settled the matter and the FIR should be quashed based on the compromise effected between the parties. No fruitful purpose would be served by continuing the matter. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the FIR be quashed. He relied upon the judgments titled Naushey Ali & ors. Vs. State of U.P. and another 2025 INSC 182 , Shankar Singh Vs. State of H
Serious offences under the Arms Act cannot be quashed based on compromise due to their societal impact, as established by judicial precedents.
The court's decision emphasized the reformatory nature of criminal jurisprudence and the societal impact of quashing criminal proceedings based on a compromise.
The main legal point established is that the inherent powers of the court under section 482 CrPC can be invoked to quash non-compoundable offences based on a settlement between the parties, consideri....
The main legal point established is that the voluntary settlement between the accused and the injured, the absence of impact on public peace, and the reformatory purpose of criminal jurisprudence jus....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to invoke inherent powers under section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings based on a voluntary settlement between the pa....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the absence of coercion in a compromise, the societal impact of the offences, and the reformatory purpose of criminal jurisprudence can justif....
The Court can quash non-compoundable offences under its inherent jurisdiction if the settlement between the parties justifies the exercise of such power and the continuation of the prosecution would ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's invocation of its inherent power under section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and all subsequent proceedings based on the compromise, consid....
Non-compoundable offences can be quashed if the parties have amicably settled their disputes and the continuation of criminal proceedings will not advance the reformative purposes of jurisprudence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
