2026:HHC:44340 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 885 of 2026 Reserved on: 1.10.2026 Date of Decision: 9.10.2026. Subhash Chand …. Petitioner Versus State of H.P.& ors. …. Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr Mukul Sood, Advocate. For the Respondents/State : Ajit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, For Respondent No.4 : Mr Virender Kumar, Advocate. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of F.I.R. No. 29 of 2020, dated 14.5.2020, registered at Police Station Rakkar, District Kangra, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 354D and 506 of the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:44340 Indian Penal Code (IPC), based on a compromise arrived at between the parties. 2. It has been asserted that the matter has been reconciled between the parties with the intervention of respectable persons of society. The informant/victim does not want to proceed further with the matter after the compromise; hence, the petition. 3. The statement of the informant/victim was recorded on 18.8.2026, in which she stated that she had entered into a compromise with the petitioner/accused voluntarily, without any influence or coercion, and she did not want to proceed further with the matter after the compromise. 4. The offence punishable under Section 506 of the IPC is compoundable under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). This Court also quashed the FIR registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 354D of the IPC in Raj Kumar vs State of HP 2022(2) Him. L.R. 1150, Navneet Mehta vs State of HP. 2022(1) Him. L.R. 444, Anil Sharma vs. State of HP. 2020 (4) Shim. LC 1899 and Kushal Kumar vs State 3 2026:HHC:44340 of HP. 2020 STPL 5621 HP. These judgments are binding on this Court. 5. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed, and F.I.R. No. 29 of 2020, dated 14.5.2020, registered at Police Station Rakkar, District Kangra, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 354D and 506 of the IPC and consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR are ordered to be quashed. 6. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any. 7. 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 9th October, 2026 (Chander)