NARESH KUMAR(Not Applicable) vs STATE OF HP AND OTHERS(Not Applicable) — CRMMO/306/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 23rd April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HPHC010189632026

Filing Number

CRMMO/2548/2026

Filing Date

06-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRMMO/306/2026

Registration Date

08-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

23-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 15-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NARESH KUMAR(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Sachin Sunail

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HP AND OTHERS(Not Applicable)

    Adv. AG 1123

  2. 2.Rajinder Kumar(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Harsh Vardhan

  3. 3.Saloni Thakur(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Harsh Vardhan

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF

    The High Court of Himachal Pradesh quashed FIR No.12/2022 against Naresh Kumar for offences under Sections 354-D and 509 IPC (stalking and obscene acts) after the complainant and victim reached an amicable compromise. The court found the offences to be petty and non-heinous, conviction chances remote, and accepted the settlement under Section 482 BNSS following Supreme Court guidelines that permit quashing in cases of personal nature lacking moral depravity when parties compromise. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    Office Objection

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma

  5. 06-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRMMO/306/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh quashed FIR No.12/2022 against Naresh Kumar for offences under Sections 354-D and 509 IPC (stalking and obscene acts) after the complainant and victim reached an amicable compromise. The court found the offences to be petty and non-heinous, conviction chances remote, and accepted the settlement under Section 482 BNSS following Supreme Court guidelines that permit quashing in cases of personal nature lacking moral depravity when parties compromise. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case