Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18303 (HP)

SHIVANK THAKUR AND ORS v. STATE OF HP AND ORS

CRMMO/93/2026 · 2026-07-31

Rakesh Kainthla

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:HHC:31928 _______________ Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 93 of 2026 Reserved on: 23.07.2026 Date of Decision: 31.07.2026 Shivank Thakur & others ....Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & others ....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No. For the petitioners : M/s. Prahsant Chaudhary and Manisha Tamta, Advocates. For the respondents : : Mr Jitender K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2/State. Ms Meera Devi, Advocate, for respondents No. 3 and 8. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing of the FIR No. 15 of 2022, dated 13.01.2022, registered at Police Station Nupur, District Kangra, H.P. for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and consequential proceedings 2 2026:HHC:31928 arising out of it based on a compromise effected between the parties. 2. It has been asserted that the petitioners and respondents are college and school students, who belong to the same Panchayat. Both the parties have settled the dispute amongst themselves with the intervention of the respectable persons of the society. The informant and victims do not want to proceed further with the matter. Hence the present petition. 3. The statements of informant Nikhil Chambial @ Gullu and victims Rajinder Singh, Akhilesh Rana, Anil Rana and Vikas Rana were recorded on 11.05.2026, in which they stated that they had entered into a compromise with the accused voluntarily without any influence from any person and they did not want to proceed further with the matter. 4. The name of Nikhil was mentioned as Nikhil Rana in the FIR, and subsequently a status report was filed in which it was mentioned that his name was Nikhil Chambial in the records, but he was also called Nikhil Rana. 5. The offences punishable under Section 341 and 323 of IPC are compoundable under Section 320 of the Code of 3 2026:HHC:31928 Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Section 320(3) Cr.P.C. provides that where the offences are compoundable and a person is liable by virtue of Section 149, the offence may be compounded. 6. This Court had already quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 147 and 148 of IPC in Umesh Kumar vs State Kumar HP 2022 STPL 10721, Satish Kumar State of H.P. 2022 STPL 10703, Inderjeet vs State of H.P. 2022(2) Himachal Law Reporter 1217 and Subhash Verma vs State of H.P. 2021 (3) Shimla Law Cases 1146 and these judgments are binding on this Court. 7. In view of these precedents, the present petition is allowed, and FIR No. 15 of 2022, dated 13.01.2022, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 147, 148 read with Section 149 of IPC at Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. and criminal proceedings pending/initiated against the petitioners-accused in pursuance thereto, are ordered to be quashed. 8. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending applications, if any. 4 2026:HHC:31928 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 the passing of the order from the website of the High Court. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 31st July,2026 (Ravinder)