2026:HHC:21017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 397 of 2025 Reserved on: 15.5.2026 Date of Decision: 2.6.2026. Vipin Kumar Machal & others ….Petitioners Versus State of HP ….Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr Desh Raj Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent No.1-State : Mr Tarun Pathak, Deputy Advocate General. For Respondent No.2 : Mr Vinod Chauhan, Advocate. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 4 of 2022, dated 23.5.2022, registered at Women Police Station, Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 498A, 354A, and 509 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and consequential proceedings arising out of the said FIR based on the compromise effected between the parties. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:21017 2. It has been asserted that the matter has been reconciled between the parties, and the informant does not want to proceed further with the matter after the compromise. Hence the petition. 3. Statement of the informant, Swati Machal, was recorded on 7.4.2026, in which she stated that she had entered into a compromise with the accused voluntarily without any influence from any person and had no objection to quashing the FIR and consequential proceedings arising out of it based on the compromise. 4. The offence punishable under Section 509 of IPC is compoundable under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. Section 320(3) of Cr.P.C. provides that where the offence is compoundable, and the accused is liable by virtue of Sections 34 and 149 of IPC, the offence can be compounded. An FIR registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC can be quashed based on the compromise as per the judgments in Gian Singh versus State, 2012 (10) SCC 303, Narender versus State of Punjab, 2014 (16) SCC 466, Vikas Singh vs. State of H.P. (2023)I DMC 335 (HP) and Sanjay Kumar vs. State of H.P2023 3 2026:HHC:21017 (1) Him L.R. 602. This Court has also quashed the FIR registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 354A of the IPC in Vidya Devi Vs. State of HP and others 2022 STPL 13724 HP, Ameen Vs. State of HP and others 2022 STPL 13743 HP, Raj Kumar Vs. State of HP and others 2022(2) Him. L.R. 1150, Mukesh Kumar and others Vs. State of HP and others 2022 STPL 9742 HP and Sunil Kumar and State of HP and others 2022(1) Him. L.R. 280. These judgments are binding on this Court. 5. Consequently, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 4 of 2022, dated 23.5.2022, registered at Women Police Station, Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 498A, 354A, 509 read with Section 34 of IPC and consequential proceedings pending/ initiated against the petitioners-accused in pursuance thereto are quashed. 6. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending miscellaneous 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 4 2026:HHC:21017 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 2nd June, 2026 (Chander)