IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CrMMO No. 338 of 2026 Reserved on: 19.08.2026 Date of Decision: __.08.2026 Surinder Kumar & 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 : Mr Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate. For respondents : : Mr Jitender Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3/State. Ms Kalaunta Devi, Advocate, for respondent No.4. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing of F.I.R No. 16 of 2025 dated 08.05.202,5 registered at Women Police Station, Una, District, Una, H.P. for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 85, 74, 75(2), 316 (2), 115(2), 351(2), 191(2) and 190 read with section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 3(1) (r) and 2 Section 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989(SC&ST Act) and consequential proceedings arising out of it based on the compromise. 2. It has been asserted that the matter has been reconciled between the parties with the intervention of respectable persons of the area and family members of both the parties. The informant and victim do not want to proceed further with the matter after the compromise. Hence the petition. 3. The statement of the informant/victim Rajni Devi was recorded on 07.07.2026, in which she stated that she had entered into a compromise voluntarily with the accused without any influence from any person and she has no objection for quashing of the FIR based on the compromise between the parties. 4. Status report has been filed, in which it has been stated that the charge sheet was filed before the Court for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 85, 74, 75(2), 316 (2), 115(2), 351(2), 191(2) and 190 read with Section 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(1) (r) and 3(1)(s) SC&ST Act. 3 5. Heard. 6. The offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 351 (2) and 115 (2) of the BNS are compoundable under Section 359 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. Section 359(3) of BNSS provides that when an offence is compoundable under this section, and a person is liable under Sections 190 and 3(5), the offences may be compounded; hence, the offences punishable under Section 316(2), 351 (2) and 115 (2) read with Sections 190 and 3(5) can be compounded under Section 359 of the BNSS. 7. The offences punishable under Sections 85, 74, and 75 (2) correspond to Sections 498-A, 354, and 354A of the IPC, respectively. The Courts have quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC 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.P 2023 (1) Him L.R. 602 based on the compromise. This Court has also quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Sections 354 and 354A of the IPC in Vidya Devi 4 vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others, 2022 STPL 13724 HP; Chaman Lal vs State of H.P., Latest HLJ 2023 (HP) (1) 213; Ameen vs State of Himachal Pradesh & others, 2023(1) Him. L.R 375 and Rakesh Verma vs State of H.P. Latest HLJ 2022 (HP) (2) 952. 8. The offences punishable under Section 191 (2) correspond to Section 147 of the IPC. This Court has quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 147 of IPC in Sivo Devi vs others vs State of HP 2023 (2), Shimla Law Cases 949, 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 based on compromise. 9. This Court has quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of offences punishable under Section 3 of the SC & ST Act in Rasik Sharma Vs. State of H.P. 2024 STPL 8598 HP, Krishan Lal and others Vs. State of HP and others, 2022 STPL 10793 HP, Satish Kumar and Others Vs. State of HP and others, 2022 STPL 10703 HP, Vinod Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of HP and others, 2017 STPL 10679 HP, and Lalit Singh and others Vs. State of HP and others, Cr. MMO No. 326 of 2016, decided on 17.04.2017 based on compromise. 5 10. Therefore, in view of these precedents, the present petition is allowed and F.I.R. No. 16 of 2025, dated 08.05.2025, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 85, 74, 75(2), 316 (2), 115(2), 351(2), 191(2) and 190 read with Section 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(1) (r) and 3(1)(s) SC&ST Act at Women Police Station Una, District Una, H.P.and the consequential criminal proceedings arising out of the said F.I.R. are quashed. 11. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending applications, if any. 12. 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 the website of the High Court. ( Rakesh Kainthla ) Judge 26th August, 2026. (Ravinder)