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.

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 Pradesh, for the last nine years. Complainant Rahul Kumar, who is in the business of property dealing and construction of building, saw an advertisement of M/s Harnidh Overseas Pathway Education (in short “HOPE”), having its office at SCO 33, 2nd Floor, Chhotti Baradari Part-2, Jalandhar, Punjab, whereby it came to be claimed that its office at Jalandhar is a branch of HOPE for providing services of Visa and employment in United Kingdom (herein after referred to as “UK”). The complainant with a view to provide job to his wife namely Sonali Thakur