2026:HHC:22392 _____________________________ 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 32 of 2026 Reserved on: 21.05.2026 Date of Decision 16 .06.2026 Rajeev Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & others ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Ms. Sangeeta Vasudeva, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, Additional Advocate General for respondent No.1/State. Ms. Kamlesh Kumari, Advocate, for respondent No.2 & 3. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 05 of 2025, dated 07.01.2025, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 281, 125(a) & 125(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act (M.V.Act) at Police Station Haroli, District Una, H.P. and consequential proceeding 2 2026:HHC:22392 arising out of the said F.I.R. based on the compromise effected between the parties. 2. It has been asserted that the parties have entered into compromise on the intervention of the respectable persons of the society. The petitioner is a young person, who is pursuing his job and has a bright future ahead of him. The continuation of the proceedings would adversely affect the petitioner’s career. Hence, the present petition. 3. Statement of informant/victim-Rajneesh Kumar and injured-Mohinder Singh were recorded on 06.03.2026, in which they stated that they had compromised the matter with petitioner/accused voluntarily without any influence from any person and had no objection in case F.I.R as well as proceedings arising out of the same are ordered to be quashed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records carefully. 5. In the present case, the F.I.R. was registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 125(a), 125(b) and 281 of BNS which correspond to Sections 337, 338 and 279 of IPC, respectively. This Court had already quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of aforesaid offences in 3 2026:HHC:22392 Sushant vs State of H.P. 2023 HHC 531, Vikas Huda vs State of H.P. 2023 STPL 3009, Kulwidner Singh vs Ankush Kumar 2023 HLR384 and Nishant vs. State 2022 Suppl. Law Cases 45, Ashish Kumar vs. State of H.P. & another:2024:HHC16368 based on compromise. 6. It was submitted on behalf of the State that the offence punishable under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act cannot be quashed because of the compromise. This submission is not acceptable because this Court had already quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 185 of Motor Vehicles Act in Rajender Thakur versus State of H.P. 2022 STPL 10700 HP, Harish Sharma versus State of H.P., 2022 STPL 10696 HP, Suresh Kumar versus State of H.P., 2019 STPL 1580 HP and Suresh Kumar versus State of H.P, 2019 STPL 4144 HP, based on compromise. These judgments are binding on this Court. 7. Consequently, the present petition is allowed, and F.I.R. No. 05 of 2025, dated 07.01.2025, registered at Police Station Haroli, District Una, H.P. for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 281, 125(a) & 125(b) of IPC and Section 185 of the M.V.Act and consequential proceedings arising out of F.I.R. are quashed. 4 2026:HHC:22392 8. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending applications, if any. 9. 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 Website of the High Court. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 16th June, 2026. (ravinder)