Hardeep Singh vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(HP) 327

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA
Hardeep Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Bhupinder Gupta, Advocate with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, Mr. Lokender Paul Thakur, Advocate.

Table of Content
1. fir alleges cheating via false uk visa/job promises (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. parties contend on s420 ipc offence disclosure (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. quashing power under s482 crpc/528 bnss scope (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. cheating requires initial dishonest inducement (ss415,420 ipc) (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
5. fir prima facie discloses cheating offence against petitioner (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
6. compromise failure; disputed facts for trial (Para 26 , 27 , 28)
7. petition to quash fir dismissed (Para 29)

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

By way of present petition, prayer has been made by the petitioner for quashing of FIR No. 275 of 2024, dated 6.9.2024, registered under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Una Sadar, District Una, Himachal Pradesh as well as consequent proceedings pending in the competent court of law.

2. For having bird’s eye view, facts relevant for adjudication of the case at hand, are that FIR sought to be quashed came to be lodged at the behest of the complainant namely Rahul Kumar and his wife Smt. Sonali Thakur, who had been living in ward No.10, Mohalla Behli, Una Town, Tehsil and District Una, Himachal Prade