CRM-M/47627/2025 of DINESH AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS on 10 September 2026

1. Sections 351 3(2)(va) of Atrocities) A consequentia dated 23.08.2

2. learned trial regard to com

3. learned Add

THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIGA

ND ANOTHER

VERSUS

HARYANA AND ANOTHER

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAL Mr. Madan Pal, Advocate for the petitioner. (Through VC) Mr. Hardeep Singh Wadhwa, DA

Mr. Sanjiv Sheoran, Advocate For respondent No.4.

*** gh Nagpal, J. (Oral) Petitioners seek quashing of FIR 1(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Scheduled Castes and Sche Act, 1989 Police Station Ta al proceedings arising therefrom 2025. On 28.08.2025, this Court direc Court/Illaqa Magistrate for rec mpromise dated 23.08.2025. In compliance of the aforesaid ditional District and Sessions

NJAB AND HARYANA ARH

CRM-M-47627-2025 Date of decision: 10.09.2026

…PETITIONERS R ...RESPONDENTS LINI SINGH NAGPAL )

AG, Punjab. R No.38 dated 27.01.2025 under a, 2023 and 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and eduled Tribes (Prevention of arori, District Karnal and all m, on the basis of compromise cted the parties to appear before cording of their statements with d order, parties appeared before Judge, Karnal on 08.09.2025.

r d f l e e h e . JYOTI

Statement o 23.09.2025. submitted hi into a valid c as under has p p p

f Investigating Officer DSP V Learned Additional District an s report recording satisfaction t compromise without any influenc been submitted: “1. As per the statement of Inve accused persons namely Deep dispute/FIR.

2. As per the statement of Inv complainant/victim namely Raj K

3. As per the statement of I accused and Victim are party to same.

4. As per the statement of I affected person including accu and all of them have been arr petition before the Hon’ble High

accused has been declared p person in the present case.

6. As per the statement of comp persons, the compromise appea without any coercion or undue i

Vikramjeet was recorded on nd Sessions Judge, Karnal, has that all the parties have entered ce or coercion. Point-wise report estigating Officer, there are two pak and Dinesh in the present estigating Officer, there is one Kamal. Investigating Officer, both the o the compromise and signed the Investigating Officer, no other used or complainant is left out rayed as party in the quashing h Court. vestigating Officer, none of the proclaimed offender/proclaimed plainant Raj Kamal and accused ar to be genuine, voluntary and influence. n s d t o t e e e r t g e d d d JYOTI

4. factum of c continuation

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

6. Bharatiya N Scheduled C Police Statio arising there compromise

7. 10.09.2026 Jyoti-V

accused is involved in any other

8. All the aspects are disclosed a 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.38 dated 27.01.2025 Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 3(1 astes and Scheduled Tribes (Pre on Tarori, District Karnal and efrom, are quashed qua the dated 23.08.2025. Pending applications, if any, stan

Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Whether Reportable :

vestigating Officer, none of the r FIR. above.” 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 5 under Sections 351(2) of

1) (r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of evention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 all consequential proceedings petitioner, on the basis of nd disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE

Yes/No

Yes/No e e , h b n e f f s f

) JYOTI