CRM-M/21418/2026 of ASHOK KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS on 11 September 2026

1. under Section Panipat, Hary basis of com in the FIR du

2. learned trial regard to com

3. learned Judic Investigating

THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIGA

UMAR AND ANOTHER VERSUS

HARYANA AND ANOTHER

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAL Mr. Manvender Chauhan, Advo for the petitioners. Mr. Kshitij Bharti, AAG, Haryan

Mr. Mohit Kakkar, Advocate For respondents No.2 and 3.

*** gh Nagpal, J. (Oral) Petitioners seek quashing of ns 323, 34 and 506 IPC, 1860 P yana and all consequential proce mpromise dated 03.04.2026. Sect uring investigation. On 21.04.2026, this Court direc Court/Illaqa Magistrate for rec mpromise dated 03.04.2026. In compliance of the aforesaid cial Magistrate First Class, Panip g Officer ASI Sunil Kumar

NJAB AND HARYANA ARH

CRM-M-21418-2026 Date of decision: 11.09.2026

…PETITIONERS R ...RESPONDENTS LINI SINGH NAGPAL cate na. FIR No.397 dated 16.09.2021 Police Station Matlauda, District eedings arising therefrom, on the tion 325 of IPC has been added cted the parties to appear before cording of their statements with d order, parties appeared before pat on 06.06.2026. Statement of was recorded on 04.07.2026.

t e d e h e f . JYOTI

Learned Judi recording sa compromise has been sub p L p

icial Magistrate First Class, Pa atisfaction that all the partie without any influence or coerc mitted: “1.As per report of Investigating persons in the present FIR nam Lahna Singh and Sh. Dheeraj so

2. As per report of Investig complainant/victims in the pr Kumar son of Sh. Lahna Singh a Rajesh Kumar.

3. All the complainant/victims a the compromise deed but com represented through Special Po namely Smt. Saroj wife of S Matlauda, District Panipat. Th Hon’ble High Court in the quas Sh. Rajesh Kumar has signed o on behalf of Sh. Aman Kumar Power of Attorney (Ex.PY) is on

4. As per the report of Investig person (accused or complainant in the quashing petition before t

anipat, has submitted her report es have entered into a valid cion. Point-wise report as under g Officer, there are two accused mely Sh. Ashok Kumar son of Sh. on of Sh. Ashok Kumar. gating Officer, there are two resent FIR namely Sh. Rajesh and Sh. Aman Kumar son of Sh. and accused persons are party to mplainant Sh. Aman Kumar is ower of Attorney i.e. his mother Sh. Rajesh Kumar, r/o village They are all parties before the shing petition. Smt. Saroj wife of on the compromise deed Ex.PX r (injured) and original Special n record. gating Officer, no other affected

t) is left out/not arrayed as party the Hon’ble High Court. t d r d

o h

o s r e e f X l d y JYOTI

p p

4. factum of c continuation

5. Judgment of and another “Gian Singh petition is all

6. 325 IPC, 18

5. As per the report of Investiga pending against the accused p proclaimed offender/person and such by any Court.

6. With respect to the genuinene the compromise, it is submitte orally whether they are volunta they replied in the affirmative. the parties also they did not app undue influence. Therefore, pr compromise arrived at betw voluntarily and without any coer

7. There is no other aspect rele reporting.” Learned State counsel has not r compromise. Since the matter of the criminal proceedings wou Following principles of law l this Court in “Kulwinder Singh ” 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 h Versus State of Punjab and o lowed. FIR No.397 dated 16.09.2021 u 60 Police Station Matlauda, Di

ting Officer, no proceedings are persons for declaring them as d they have not been declared as ess, authenticity and veracity of d that parties were questioned arily settling the matter to which Further, from the demeanor of pear to be under any coercion or rima-facie it appears that the ween the parties is genuine, rcion or undue influence. evant to the present case worth raised any dispute regarding the has been amicably resolved, uld be an exercise in futility. laid down by the Full Bench h and others Vs. State of Punjab 2 and Hon’ble Supreme Court in others”(2012) 10 SCC 303, the under Sections 323, 34, 506 and istrict Panipat, Haryana and all e s s f d h f r e

h e , h b n e d l JYOTI

consequentia on the basis o

7. 11.09.2026 Jyoti-V

al proceedings arising therefrom, of compromise dated 03.04.2026 Pending applications, if any, stan

Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Whether Reportable :

, are quashed qua the petitioner,

6. nd disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE

Yes/No

Yes/No ,

) JYOTI