2026 Supreme(Online)(HP) 2927
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MMO No.314 of 2024
Date of Decision: 25.05.2026
Rajesh …….Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh… Responden t
Coram:Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
For the Petitioner: Ms. Deeksha Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, DeputyAdvocates General.
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge
May 25, 2026
(sunil)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO No.314 of 2024 Date of Decision: 25.05.2026
_______________________________________________________
Rajesh …….Petitioner
Versus State of Himachal Pradesh
… Responden t Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner: Ms. Deeksha Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy
Advocates General.
_______________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
hInstant petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, lays gchallenge to order dated 14.03.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, in case No.12-S/10 of 2018, affirming the order dated 30.01.2018 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, whereby private complaint having been filed by the petitioner-complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for registration of case against accused under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code, came
to be rejected.
::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2026 13:42:18 :::CIS
##PAGE2##2
2. Precisely, the fact of the case as emerge from the pleadings as well as other material adduced on recorPd by the
respective parties are that on 01.06.2014 at around 10:30 p.m., while complainant Rajesh Gautam along his friend Narender Chauhan was present at Chambaghat motor market to pick up his vehicle, which he had allegedly given for repair work, he ohad a minor scuffle with three persons travelling in a white-colou red i20 car bearing registration No.HP-14B-0617, namely Shiven Chauhan, Karan Kohli and third unidentified person. Dis pute inter se both the parties was resolved with the interventioon of Ripu Daman, who is one of the shop owners in ChambaghaCt motor market. Allegedly Shiven Chauhan and his other friends while leaving the spot, extended threats to the complainant and after ten minutes, occupants of afore i20 car came back on the spot driving their car in a rash and negligent manner with the intention
ito kill the complainant as well as three persons standing on the spot.
All the three persons including complainant were hit head-on by the afore car, resulting into serious injuries. Afore vehicle did not stop and ran towards Shimla. However, nearby shop owners helped all the three injured to get into a car and they were taken to a hospital at Solan, where they were medically examined. The left leg of one person, namely Narender Chauhan, was found fractured, while the
other two sustained bruises and abrasions on their bodies.
::: Downloaded on - 31/05/2026 13:42:18 :::CIS
##PAGE3##3
3. Police after having taken note of aforesaid incident, lodged FIR against the occupants of i20 car, namely Shiven PChauhan,
Karan Kohli and others under Sections 279, 337, 506 and 34 of Indian Penal Code. Since complainant was not satisfied with the investigation conducted by the Investigating O fficer, he filed private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C, proaying therein for registration of case against the accused under Sec tions 307 of Indian Penal Code. In afore complaint, it came to be specifically averred at the behest of the complainant that injuries suffered by him as well as Narender Chauhan were noto on account of rash and negligent driving of the accused, ratCher same were caused on account of attempt made by the accused to kill and crush them under their vehicle. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan, after having recorded the statements of the complainant as well as two persons namely Rajesh Gautam and Ripu
iDaman, rejected the complaint and arrived at a conclusion that no case much less under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code is made out against the accused.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan, complainant f