SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(HP) 9749

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH
AMIT KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HP AND ANR – Respondent
CRMMO/112/2025



Petitioner Advocates:Narendra Guleria ,Respondent Advocate: AG Naresh K Sharma AG

##PAGE1##

2025:HHC:46509

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr.MMO No.: 112 of 2025

Decided on : 31.12.2025

Amit Kumar …Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh & Another …Respondents

Coram

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1

For the petitioner : Petitioner in person, with Mr.

Lovneesh Thakur, Advocate.

For the respondents : Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional

Advocate General, with Ms. Ranjna

h Patial and Ms. Avni Kochhar Mehta,

Deputy Advocates General, for

g respondent No. 1-State.

Respondent No. 2 in person with Mr.

H Naresh K. Sharma, Advocate.

Virender Singh, Judge (oral).

Petitioner Amit Kumar has filed the present

petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’),

for quashing of FIR No. 29/2023, dated 21.03.2023,

(hereinafter referred to as the FIR, in question), registered

1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 07:32:18 :::CIS

##PAGE2##

2 2025:HHC:46509

with Police Station, Swarghat, District Bilaspur, H.P.,

under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal

Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), on merits, as well

as, the proceedings resultant thereto, which are stated to

be pending before the Court of learned fJudicial Magistrate

First Class, Court No. 1 Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P.

(hereinafter referred to as the t‘trial Court’).

2. However, during the pendency of the present

petition, the matter has now been compromised, between

the petitioner and respondent No.2.

3. Now, the relief of quashing has been sought, on

the bhasis of the compromise, which has taken place

bgetween the petitioner and respondent No.2.

i4. According to the petitioner, on the statement of

respondent No.2, the FIR, in question, has been registered

against him.

5. After registration of the FIR, the police has

conducted the investigation and submitted the report

under Section 173(2) Cr.PC, which is now pending

adjudication before the learned trial Court.

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 07:32:18 :::CIS

##PAGE3##

3 2025:HHC:46509

6. According to the petitioner, during the

pendency of the aforesaid case, respondent No. 2, has also

filed the petition under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu

Marriage Act for annulment of her marriage with him,

before the Court of Principal Judge, Famfily Court Bilaspur.

The said petition was allowed in favour of respondent No.

2, on 13.12.2025. t

7. Thereafter, a compromise had also taken place

between the petitioner and respondent No. 2. The terms

and conditions of the compromise have been reduced into

writing, which are Annexure A-2.

8. h On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has

bgeen made that the FIR, in question, as well as,

iproceedings resultant thereto, pending before the learned

trial Court, may kindly be quashed and set aside, qua the

petitioners, by allowing the petition.

9. When put to notice, respondent No.1-State has

filed the reply, mentioning therein the circumstances, in

which, the FIR, in question, has been registered, at the

instance of respondent No.2, as well as, the manner, in

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 07:32:18 :::CIS

##PAGE4##

4 2025:HHC:46509

which, the investigation has been conducted, by the police,

in this case.

10. Respondent No. 2, who, at one point of time,

had put the criminal machinery into motion, appeared

before this Court and has stated that thfe petitioner, who is

her husband, has filed the petition for quashing the FIR.

Matter has been compromtised between me and the

petitioner, vide compromise Annexure P-2. The said

compromise has been taken place between them due to the

fact that since the petitioner was already married, as such,

she filed the petition under Section 12(1)(a) of Hindu

Marrihage Act for annulment of her marriage with petitioner,

bgefore learned Principal Judge, Family Court Bilaspur,

iDistrict Bilaspur, H.P. and the matter has been

compromised between them and her marriage with the

petitioner was annulled, on 13.12.2025. Thereafter, a

compr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top