RAKESH KUMAR(Not Applicable) vs STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable) — CRMMO/169/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 06th May 2026.
CNR: HPHC010096232026
Filing Number
CRMMO/1477/2026
Filing Date
06-Mar-2026
Registration No
CRMMO/169/2026
Registration Date
11-Mar-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
06-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Last updated 02-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RAKESH KUMAR(Not Applicable)
Adv. Kulbhushan Khajuria
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable)
Adv. AG 1123
-
2.XXX(Not Applicable)
Adv. P K Verma
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF
Case Summary: Rakesh Kumar v. State of HP, Cr. MMO No. 169/2026 The High Court of Himachal Pradesh quashed FIR No. 44 of 2025 against petitioner Rakesh Kumar for offences under BNS 2023 sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 78, 79, 352, and 351(3), based on a voluntary compromise between the parties. The victim's statement confirmed she settled the matter willingly without coercion. The court held that most charged offences are compoundable under BNSS section 359, and followed binding precedent permitting FIR quashing upon compromise in similar cases. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
22-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF
-
19-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF
-
19-Mar-2026
Notice Before Admission
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla
-
12-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF
-
12-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
06-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CRMMO/169/2026
Case Summary: Rakesh Kumar v. State of HP, Cr. MMO No. 169/2026 The High Court of Himachal Pradesh quashed FIR No. 44 of 2025 against petitioner Rakesh Kumar for offences under BNS 2023 sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 78, 79, 352, and 351(3), based on a voluntary compromise between the parties. The victim's statement confirmed she settled the matter willingly without coercion. The court held that most charged offences are compoundable under BNSS section 359, and followed binding precedent permitting FIR quashing upon compromise in similar cases. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts