Tara Chand Saini Vs State of Hp and Another — Motor Accident Claims | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

Tara Chand Saini Vs State of Hp and Another — Motor Accident Claims | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of FIR No. 01 of 2025 dated 01.01.2025, registered for offences under Sections 125(a), 125(b) and 281 of BNS and Section 187 of M.V. Act at Police Station Balh, District Mandi, H.P., and of consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR; pending applications, if any, disposed of; parties permitted to produce a downloaded copy of the judgment before concerned authorities, who shall not insist on a certified copy.

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 01 of 2025 dated 01.01.2025, registered at Police Station Balh, District Mandi for offences under Sections 125(a), 125(b) and 281 of BNS and Section 187 of M.V. Act, and the consequential proceedings arising out of it, should be quashed on the basis of the compromise reached between the petitioner and the informant.

Court's answer

The FIR was registered for offences punishable under Sections 125(a), 125(b) and 281 of BNS, which correspond to Sections 337, 338 and 279 IPC respectively, and this Court had already quashed FIRs for these offences based on compromise.

Ratio / Principle

This Court has already quashed FIRs registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 187 of M.V. Act in the cases cited.

Key takeaways

The judgments in which such FIRs were earlier quashed are binding upon this Court.ratio¶26
The present petition is allowed.ratio¶27
The FIR registered at Police Station Balh, District Mandi, H.P., as well as consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR, are quashed.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing on compromise — Cr. MMO allowed. FIR No. 01 of 2025 dated 01.01.2025, registered at Police Station Balh, District Mandi (H.P.) for offences under Sections 125(a), 125(b) and 281 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles (M.V.) Act, together with consequential proceedings, quashed on the basis of compromise between petitioner Tara Chand and informant Hari Singh, whose statement recording a voluntary settlement (25.02.2026) and no objection was placed on record. The Court noted that BNS Sections 125(a), 125(b) and 281 correspond to IPC Sections 337, 338 and 279, and relied on its earlier compromise-based quashings (Sushant; Vikas Huda; Kulwidner Singh; Nishant; and for Section 187 M.V. Act, Suresh Kumar; Vijender Mehta; Sandeep Kumar), observing those judgments to be binding upon it. Single judge: Rakesh Kainthla.

2026:HHC:12751

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. MMO No. 1259 of 2025 Reserved on: 31.03.2026 Date of Decision: 22.04.2026

Tara Chand ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & another ...Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No.

For the petitioner : Mr. G.R.Palsra Advocate, for the petitioner.

For the respondents : Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, Additional Advocate General for respondent No.1/State.

Mr. Lokesh Thakur, Advocate, for the respondent No.2.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 01 of 2025, dated 01.01.2025, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 125(a), 125(b)

and 281 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 187 of Motor Vehicles (M.V.) Act at Police Station Balh, District

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

2

2026:HHC:12751

Mandi, H.P. as well as consequential proceedings arising out of the said F.I.R. based on the compromise.

It has been asserted that the petitioner and informant have amicably settled the matter amongst themselves with the intervention of respectable persons of the society. The informant does not want to proceed further with the matter after compromise. Hence, the present petition.

Statement of informant-Hari Singh was recorded on 25.02.2026, in which he stated that he had compromised the matter with the petitioner voluntarily without any influence from any person and he has no objection in case the F.I.R as well as proceedings arising out of the same are ordered to be quashed.

The police have filed a status report reproducing the contents of the F.I.R. and the steps taken during the investigation.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records carefully.

In the present case, the F.I.R. was registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 125(a), 125(b) and 281 of BNS which corresponds to Sections 337, 338 and 279 of IPC, respectively. This Court had already quashed the F.I.R.

3

2026:HHC:12751

registered for the commission of aforesaid offences in Sushant vs

State of H.P. 2023 HHC 531, Vikas Huda vs State of H.P. 2023 STPL 3009, Kulwidner Singh vs Ankush Kumar 2023 HLR384 and Nishant vs. State 2022 Suppl. Law Cases 45 based on compromise. This Court has already quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 187 of M.V. Act in Suresh Kumar v. State of H.P.2022(1) Him L.R. (HC) 81, Vijender Mehta and another vs. State of H.P. and another (2023) ACC 488 (HP) and Sandeep Kumar vs. State of H.P. and others II (2003) ACC 651 (H.P) and these judgments are binding upon this Court.

Consequently, the present petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 01 of 2025 dated 01.01.2025, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 125(a), 125(b) and 281 of the BNS and Section 187 of M.V. Act at Police Station Balh, District Mandi, H.P. as well as consequential proceedings arising out of F.I.R. are quashed.

Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending applications, if any.

Parties are permitted to produce a copy of this judgment, downloaded from the webpage of the High Court of

4

2026:HHC:12751

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

22^nd April, 2026

(ravinder)