2026:HHC:23648 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 453 of 2026 Reserved on: 17.6.2026 Date of Decision: 22.6.2026. Kolling …. Petitioner Versus State of HP & anr. …. Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr Parikshit Rathour, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : Mr Ajit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. For Respondent No.2 : Mr Rakesh Thakur, Advocate. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 79 of 2022, dated 14.4.2022, registered at Police Station Baddi, District Solan, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 324, 451 and 506 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 2. It has been asserted that the parties have entered into a compromise after the registration of the FIR to maintain cordial relations amongst them. The continuation of the proceedings would be a futile exercise. Hence, the petition. 3. The statement of the informant/victim was recorded on 20.5.2026, in which he stated that he had entered into a compromise with the accused voluntarily without any influence from any person and had no objection to the quashing of the FIR as per the compromise. 4. I have given a considerable thought to the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the records carefully. 5. The offences punishable under Sections 451 and 506 of the IPC are compoundable under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held in Suraj Singh Gujar v. State of M.P., 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2414 that the conviction recorded for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC can be quashed by taking recourse to Section 482 of Cr.P.C. This Court had already quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC in 3 Ram Krishan alias Ramu vs. State of H.P.& others Latest HLJ 2021(2)(HP) 1327, Amir Hussain vs State of Himachal Pradesh 2022(1)Him.L.R.195, Braham Dass & others vs. State of H.P & others 2022(1) Him.L.R.466, Inderjeet Singh & others vs State of H.P. & others 2022(2)Him.LR.1217, Raj Kumar @ Raj & Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Latest HLJ 2022(HP) (1) 759 and Rukam Deen Vs State of Himachal Pradesh 2023(1) Him. L.R.(HC) 616 based on the compromise. These judgments are binding on this Court. 6. In view of these binding precedents, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 79 of 2022, dated 14.4.2022, registered at Police Station Baddi, District Solan, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 324, 451 and 506 of IPC and consequential proceedings pending/initiated against the petitioner-accused in pursuance thereof are ordered to be quashed. 7. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any. 8. 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 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 22nd June, 2026 (Chander)