Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/39185/2026 of DAKSH BHATNAGAR AND ANR Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. on 27 August 2026
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (138) CRM-M-39185-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:-27.08.2026 DAKSH BHATNAGAR AND ANOTHER … Petitioners Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Ashish Gupta,
CRM-M-39185-2026 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
(138)
CRM-M-39185-2026 (O&M)
Date of Decision:-27.08.2026
DAKSH BHATNAGAR AND ANOTHER
… Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
...Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL
Present:
Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, Addl. A.G. Haryana.
Ms. Devika Kamboj, Advocate,
for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
****
VIRINDER AGGARWAL
, J
. (Oral)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking quashing of FIR No. 177 dated 25.04.2025, under Sections 115, 126, 351(2) of BNS, 2023 (323, 341, 506 of IPC) and subsequently Section 351(2) of BNS (Section 506 of IPC) has been deleted and Section 117(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 (Section 325, 506 and 345 of IPC) has been added later on at the time of filing of challan registered at police station City Rohtak, District Rohtak, Haryana along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise dated 08.06.2026 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.
2. Vide order dated 20.07.2026, the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise. SAURAV PATHANIA 2026.08.27 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-39185-2026 (O&M) 2
3. Report has since been received from learned District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak, in pursuance to the directions of this Court wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report(s) compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the private respondents have also made statement to the effect that they would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused- petitioners is quashed.
4. The trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties along with its report.
5. Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioners.
6. In view of the report of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Rohtak, and the principles laid down by Hon’ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Pun- jab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it qua petitioners, are hereby quashed.
7. Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below.
8. Petition stands disposed of. (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 27th August, 2026 JUDGE S. Pathania Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No SAURAV PATHANIA 2026.08.27 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document