Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:16487 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO No. 419 of 2025 Date of Decision: 28.05.2025 Dhruv Vashisht ... petitioner Versus State of H.P. and ors. ....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Sahil Thakur, Advocates. For respondent No.1 : Mr. Jitender Sharma, Additional Advocate General. For respondent No.2 : Mr. Sudhanshu Shukla, Advocate. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (oral) The present petition has been filed for quashing of the FIR No.47 of 2025 dated 10.02.2025 registered for the commission of offfence punishable under Sections 281, 125(a) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Sectoin 187 of Motor Vehicles Act at Police Station Sadar, Una and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 04.04.2025. As per the FIR, informant-Dharam Pal was driving an auto bearing registration No. HP-02U-0309 in which two women were travelling. A vehicle bearing registration No. CH01- CH-7548 hit auto and as a result of which Darshan and Dharam Pal-the driver of the Auto had received injuries. The driver of the auto has been produced before the Court today, who has made a 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:16487 ) statement that he had entered into a compromise and he does not want to proceed further with the matter. Mr. Sahil Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that only driver is the necessary party and the occupants of the auto are not necessary parties because they had not sustained injuries. This submission is not acceptable. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner which endangered the safety of the occupants of the auto, therefore, in these circumstances, the occupants of the auto whose safety was endangered are necessary parties and the submission that they are not necessary parties because they had not sustained injuries is not acceptable. Since, all the parties are not present before the Court today, therefore, the present petition fails and the same is dismissed so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 28th May, 2025 (saurav pathania)