Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/8929/2023 of PUSHPA Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 23 July 2026
(O& M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-8929-2023 (O& M) Date of Decision: 23.07.2026 Pushpa ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Shilak Ram Hooda, Advocate, for the
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-8929-2023 (O& M) Date of Decision: 23.07.2026 Pushpa
... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Shilak Ram Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Ms. Diya Sodhi, Sr. DAG, Haryana. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No.28 dated 05.02.2020 (Annexure P-3) under Sections 4(1), 4(1)(a), 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Sections 379 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Bahadurgarh, Distt. Jhajjar and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom as the offence stands compounded.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that as per letter dated 12.03.2020 (Annexure P-4), the offence already stands compounded and therefore, the present FIR (Annexure P-3) is liable to be quashed.
3. The learned State counsel, on the other hand, contends that offences of this kind cannot be compounded especially when provisions of the IPC have also been invoked. Reliance is placed on the judgment in ‘Kanwar Pal Singh versus The State of Uttar Pradesh and another’ SUKHPREET KAUR 2026.07.24 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh
(Criminal Appeal No.1920 of 2019 arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.10707 of 2019 decided on 18.12.2019) to contend that the present petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. A perusal of the letter dated 12.03.2020 (Annexure P-4) would reveal that it is a request for provide legal advice made by the Assistant Mining Engineer, Mines & Geology Department, Rohtak/Jhajjar to the District Attorney, Jhajjar. In furtherance of the said letter, there is nothing on record to establish that the District Attorney, Jhajjar wrote back to the Assistant Mining Engineer, Mines & Geology Department, Rohtak/Jhajjar that the FIR could be cancelled. In fact, the challan already stands submitted under Sections 4(1), 4(1)A, 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Sections 379, 409 IPC against the accused persons (including the present petitioner-Pushpa).
6. Further, in view of the judgment in Kanwar Pal Singh (supra), the question of compounding of the offence does not arise.
7. In view of the above, I find no merit in the present petition and the same stands dismissed.
8. The pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) July 23, 2026 JUDGE
sukhpreet Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No SUKHPREET KAUR 2026.07.24 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh