2026:HHC:12541 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO No. 288 of 2026 Decided on: 20.04.2026 ____________________________________________________________ Ashwani Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. ...Respondents Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner: Mr. Naveen Kumar Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ajit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.1. Respondents No.2 & 3 present in person with Ms. Manjeet Kaur, Advocate. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral) In view of controversy involved in present petition, the same is taken up for final disposal at this stage. The parties are duly represented through their counsel. 2. By way of present petition instituted under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023(in short BNSS), the petitioner has prayed for quashing of an FIR No.195 of 2017, dated 04.09.2017, under Sections 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:12541 279, 337, 338 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 187 and 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Nagrota Bagwan, Distt. Kangra (HP) and the consequential proceedings pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. II, Kangra, Distt. Kangra, H.P. (for short “learned trial Court). 3. The status report reveals that the police have filed the charge sheet and the matter is now listed for the evidence of the prosecution witnesses on 18.05.2026 and 19.05.2026, respectively before the learned trial Court. Out of 19 witnesses cited by the police, statements of 8 witnesses have been recorded. Since the parties have compromised the matter, no fruitful purpose will be served to keep the matter pending. As per the statements of respondents No.2 & 3, recorded today, they do not have any objection to quash the FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom. 4. A three-Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has held that where the parties have settled their dispute, the Court may quash the proceedings to secure the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of the 3 2026:HHC:12541 process of the Court. However, the Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Since in the present case, the offences committed by the petitioner are not heinous and serious like murder, rape etc., this Court is exercising its powers to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice. The statements of complainant and injured have also been recorded. They have no objection to quash the FIR and consequential proceedings emanating therefrom. Thus, it is a fit case to quash the FIR and the consequential proceedings pending before the learned trial Court. If the proceedings are not quashed, it will waste the valuable time of the learned trial Court in recording the statements of the witnesses and thereafter hearing of the matter, time which could be instead be devoted to other cases. 5. Once the complainant and the injured have compromised the matter, there are bleak and remote chances of conviction of the petitioner. Therefore, keeping in view the statements of the complainant and the injured as well as nature of offences, the proceedings are ordered to be quashed to subserve the justice. 6. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and 4 2026:HHC:12541 FIR No.195 of 2017, dated 04.09.2017, under Sections 279, 337, 338 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 187, 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Nagrota Bagwan, Distt. Kangra (HP) and the consequential proceedings now pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. II, Kangra, Distt. Kangra, H.P., which are registered as registration No. 48 of 2018, titled, State of HP vs. Ashwani Kumar, are ordered to be quashed and set aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the aforesaid offences. 7. The petition is accordingly disposed of. 20 th April , 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (Anurag) Judge