Vaibhav Vs State of Hp and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Vaibhav Vs State of Hp and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of FIR No. 11 of 2026, dated 17.2.2026, registered at Police Station Kandaghat, District Solan, H.P., for offences punishable under Sections 281 and 125(a) of the BNS, and of the consequential proceedings pending/initiated against the petitioner-accused in pursuance thereof; petition disposed of in the above terms, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any.

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 11 of 2026, dated 17.2.2026, registered at Police Station Kandaghat, District Solan, H.P., for offences punishable under Sections 281 and 125(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the consequential proceedings arising out of it, can be quashed on the basis of the compromise effected between the petitioner and the informant.

Court's answer

The offence punishable under Section 281 of BNS corresponds to Section 279 of the IPC, and the offence punishable under Section 125(a) of BNS corresponds to Section 337 of the IPC.

Ratio / Principle

This Court has already quashed FIRs registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC based on compromise (Sushant vs State of H.P.; Vikas Huda vs. State of H.P.; Kulwidner Singh vs Ankush Kumar; Nishant vs. State), and these judgments are binding on this Court.

Key takeaways

In view of these binding precedents, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 11 of 2026, dated 17.2.2026, registered at Police Station Kandaghat, District Solan, H.P., for offences punishable under Sections 281 and 125(a) of the BNS, along with the consequential proceedings pending/initiated against the petitioner-accused in pursuance thereof, are ordered to be quashed.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

FIR quashed on compromise — High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla (Cr. MMO No. 239 of 2026, decided 01.7.2026, Rakesh Kainthla, Judge): Petitioner Vaibhav sought quashing of FIR No. 11 of 2026, dated 17.2.2026, registered at Police Station Kandaghat, District Solan, H.P., for offences punishable under Sections 281 and 125(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), and the consequential proceedings arising out of it, on the basis of a compromise effected with the informant. The informant, Shubham Vishwas, whose statement was recorded on 18.05.2026, confirmed the compromise, stated he did not want to proceed further, and had no objection to quashing. The Court recorded that Section 281 of BNS corresponds to Section 279 of IPC and Section 125(a) of BNS corresponds to Section 337 of IPC, and relied on its own earlier decisions quashing FIRs for those IPC offences on compromise — Sushant vs State of H.P. 2023 HLJ 531; Vikas Huda vs. State of H.P. 2023 STPL 3009; Kulwidner Singh vs Ankush Kumar 2023 HLR 384; Nishant vs. State 2022 Suppl. Shim Law Cases 45 — holding them binding, and accordingly allowed the petition, ordering the FIR and the consequential proceedings pending/initiated against the petitioner-accused to be quashed.

2026:HHC:25728

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. MMO No. 239 of 2026 Reserved on: 24.6.2026 Date of Decision: 01.7.2026.

Vaibhav ….Petitioner Versus State of HP & anr. …. Respondents

Coram

*Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla* *Whether approved for reporting?*¹	,*Judg* *No.*	e.
For the Petitioner :	Mr Advo	Harish cate.	Sharma,
For Respondent No.1-State :	Mr Addi	Lokender tional Advoca	Kutlehria, te General.
For Respondents No.2 :	Mr Advo	Bhim Raj cate.	Sharma,

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 11 of 2026, dated 17.2.2026, registered at Police Station Kandaghat, District Solan, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 281 and 125(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and consequential proceedings arising

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

2

2026:HHC:25728

out of the FIR based on the compromise effected between the parties.

It has been asserted that the informant has settled the matter with the petitioner with the intervention of their relatives and respectable persons of the society. The parties want to maintain a cordial relationship. Hence, the petition.

The statement of the informant, Shubham Vishwas, was recorded on 18.05.2026, in which he stated that he had entered into a compromise with the petitioner and did not want to proceed further with the matter after the compromise. He had no objection to quashing the FIR based on a compromise effected between the parties.

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

The offence punishable under Section 281 of BNS corresponds to Section 279, and Section 125(a) of BNS corresponds to Section 337 of IPC. This Court has already quashed the F.I.R. registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC in Sushant vs State of H.P. 2023 HLJ 531, Vikas Huda vs. State of H.P. 2023 STPL 3009, Kulwidner Singh vs

3

2026:HHC:25728

Ankush Kumar 2023 HLR 384 and Nishant vs. State 2022 Suppl. Shim

Law Cases 45 based on compromise. These judgments are binding on this Court.

In view of these binding precedents, the present petition is allowed and the FIR No. 11 of 2026, dated 17.2.2026, registered at Police Station Kandaghat, District Solan, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 281 and 125(a) of the BNS and the consequential proceedings pending/initiated against the petitioner-accused in pursuance thereof are ordered to be quashed.

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

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

1st July, 2026 (Chander)