IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 305 of 2025 Reserved on: 23.9.2025 Date of Decision: 18.11.2025 Rajni Kant ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & others ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved ofor reporting? No.

For the petitioner : Mr Rahul Singh Verma, Advocate. For respondent No.1/State : Mr Prashant Sen, Deputy Advocate General.

For respondents No.2 & 3 : Mr Anubhav Chopra, Advocate.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 152 of 2024, dated 12.10.2024, registered at Police Station Puruwala, District Sirmour, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 281 and 106 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). It has been asserted that the parties have entered into a compromise with the intervention of respectable members of their village. They have decided to live peacefully. Hence, the petition.

2. The statements of informant Pooja Devi and legal representatives of the victim Rajinder Singh and Chhumma Devi were recorded, in which they stated that they had no objection in case the FIR is ordered to be quashed based on the compromise between the parties.

3. Heard.

4. The offence punishable under Section 281 of BNS corresponds to Section 279 of IPC, and the offence punishable under Section 106 of BNS corresponds to Section 304-A of IPC. This Court has already quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304A of IPC in Avinash Singh Rana vs. State of H.P., 2023 STPL 3181 HP, Amit Singla vs. State of H.P., 2022 STPL 13806 HP, Mayank vs. State of H.P., 2021 (2) Shim. LC 980, Dr Subhash Thakur vs. State of H.P. 2021 STPL 6332 HP and Rajvinder Sharma vs. State of H.P. 2019 (3) Shim. LC 1781 based on a compromise. These judgments are binding on this Court.

5. Therefore, in view of these precedents, the present petition is allowed and the FIR No. 152 of 2024, dated 12.10.2024, registered at Police Station Puruwala, District Sirmour, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 281 and 106 of BNS is quashed. Consequent upon tfhe quashing of the FIR, criminal proceedings pending/initiated against the petitioner-

t .

accused in pursuance thereto are also quashed

6. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending applications, if any.

7. 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

18^th November 2025 (Chander)