PRABHAT NUGAL (MINOR) AND OTHERS(Not Applicable) vs THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable) — CRMMO/221/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 30th March 2026.
CNR: HPHC010140782026
Filing Number
CRMMO/1956/2026
Filing Date
19-Mar-2026
Registration No
CRMMO/221/2026
Registration Date
23-Mar-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
30-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Last updated 14-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.PRABHAT NUGAL (MINOR) AND OTHERS(Not Applicable)
Adv. Suresh Kumar
-
2.Karma(Not Applicable)
Adv. Suresh Kumar
-
3.Suryansh Negi (Minor)(Not Applicable)
Adv. Suresh Kumar
-
4.Nayan(Not Applicable)
Adv. Suresh Kumar
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable)
Adv. ,Anil Kumar Manget,AG 1123
-
2.Sujal Rana (Minor)(Not Applicable)
Adv. Anil Kumar Manget
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
30-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF
Summary The High Court of Himachal Pradesh quashed FIR No. 28/2026 and acquitted the minor accused after the complainant and his father testified under oath that they had amicably settled the dispute with the accused, who are their son's classmates. The court found that the alleged offences (unlawful confinement, wrongful restraint, and assault) did not involve heinous crimes or moral turpitude, conviction chances were remote given the complainant's statement, and accepting the compromise would serve justice and restore peace between the parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF
-
25-Mar-2026
Notice Before Admission
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma
-
19-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CRMMO/221/2026
Summary The High Court of Himachal Pradesh quashed FIR No. 28/2026 and acquitted the minor accused after the complainant and his father testified under oath that they had amicably settled the dispute with the accused, who are their son's classmates. The court found that the alleged offences (unlawful confinement, wrongful restraint, and assault) did not involve heinous crimes or moral turpitude, conviction chances were remote given the complainant's statement, and accepting the compromise would serve justice and restore peace between the parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts