2026:HHC:25419 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 392 of 2026 Reserved on: 22.6.2026 Date of Decision: 30.6.2026. Yuv Raj Khetan ….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 Surila Sangam, Advocate, vice Mr Lokesh Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent No.1-State : Mr Lokender Kutlehria, Additional Advocate General. For Respondent No.2 : Mr Manjeet Singh, Advocate. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 85 of 2024, dated 1.6.2024, registered at Police Station Banjar, District Kullu, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:25419 Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 187 of Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act) and consequential proceedings arising out of the said FIR based on the compromise effected between the parties. 2. It has been asserted that the parties have amicably settled the matter with the intervention of the respectable persons of the society. The informant/victim does not want to proceed further with the matter after the compromise with the petitioner and has no objection to quashing the FIR based on a compromise between the parties. 3. The statement of the informant/victim Dule Singh was recorded on 4.5.2026, in which he stated that he had entered into a compromise with the accused voluntarily and had no objection to quashing the FIR based on the compromise between the parties. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records carefully. 5. The FIR has been registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of the IPC and Section 187 of the MV Act. This Court has already quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of offences punishable 3 2026:HHC:25419 under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC in Sushant vs State of H.P. 2023 HLJ 531, Vikas Huda vs. State of H.P. 2023 STPL 3009, Kulwidner Singh vs Ankush Kumar 2023 HLR 384 and Nishant vs. State 2022 Suppl. Law Cases 45 based on the compromise. This Court has also quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 187 of the MV Act, inter alia, in Rajender Thakur Vs. State of H.P. and others 2022 STPL 10700 HP and Akshay Kumar and others Vs. State of HP and others 2022 STPL 9456 HP. These judgments are binding on this Court. 6. In view of these binding precedents, the present petition is allowed, and FIR No. 85 of 2024, dated 1.6.2024, registered at Police Station Banjar, District Kullu, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of the IPC and Section 187 of the MV Act and the consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR 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 authorities shall not insist on the production of a certified 4 2026:HHC:25419 copy, but if required, may verify passing of the order from the Website of the High Court. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 30th June, 2026 (Chander)