2026:HHC:2973 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 864 of 2025 Reserved on: 1.1.2026 Date of Decision: 9.1.2026. Nikhil Kumar alias Rikki ...Petitioner Versus State of HP ...Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : M/s Vijender Katoch and Kapil Sharma, Advocates. For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, Additional Advocate General. For Respondents No.2 and 3 : M/s Khem Raj and Shivanshu Attri, Advocate. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioners has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 101 of 2023, dated 10.5.2023, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), at Police Station, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. and consequential 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:2973 proceedings arising out of the FIR based on compromise effected between the parties. 2. The statement of the informant, Rakesh Kumar, was recorded on 13.10.2025, in which he stated that he had reported the matter to the police and had no objection in case the FIR was ordered to be quashed based on compromise effected between the parties. 3. I have heard M/s Vijender Katoch and Kapil Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.1/State and M/s Khem Raj and Shivanshu Attri, learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3. 4. Mr. Vijender Katoch, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise voluntarily without any influence from any person and the FIR be quashed based on the compromise effected between the parties. He relied upon the judgments titled Bhupinder Kumar Vs. State of HP and others 2022:HHC:10319, Gaurav Kumar Vs. State of HP and others 2025:HHC:17172, Avdhesh and others Vs. State of U.P., through Private Secretary, Application No.9559 of 2022, decided on 20.12.2022 and Madhukar and others 3 2026:HHC:2973 Vs. State of Maharashtra and another 2025:INSC:819, in support of his submission. 5. Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent-State submitted that the offence is heinous and involves the kidnapping of a minor girl for immoral purposes. Such an offence is against the society at large. Therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be dismissed. 6. Mr. Khem Raj, learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 adopted the submissions made by Mr. Vijender Katoch, learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. This Court had quashed the FIR registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of IPC in Bhupinder Kumar (supra) and Gaurav Kumar (supra) based on compromise effected between the parties. These judgments are binding on this Court. 8. In view of the above the present petition is allowed and the .FIR No. 101 of 2023, dated 10.5.2023, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC at Police Station, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. and consequential proceedings arising out of the said FIR are 4 2026:HHC:2973 ordered to be quashed based on the compromise effected between the parties. 9. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending applications, if any. 10. 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 Website of the High Court. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 9th January, 2026 (Chander)