CRM-M/61588/2025 of HARMAN SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER on 22 July 2026

IN

Harman Sin

State of Har

CORAM: H

Present:

Shalini Sing

under Sectio District Panc basis of com parties.

2. learned trial regard to com

3. learned Sub D of Investigat 588-2025 (O&M) THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIGA

ngh

VERSUS ryana and another

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAL Mr. Kamal Chaudhary, Advocat Mr. Kshitij Bharati, AAG, Hary

Ms. Anjali Chaudhary, Advocat Mr. Gaurav Verma, Advocate fo

**** gh Nagpal, J. (Oral) Petitioner seeks quashing of F ons 125(a), 125(b) and 281 o chkula and all subsequent procee mpromise dated 28.10.2025 said On 03.11.2025, this Court direc Court/Illaqa Magistrate for rec mpromise. In compliance of the aforesaid Divisional Judicial Magistrate, K ting officer- HC Mahipal, No.

NJAB AND HARYANA ARH CRM-M-61588-2025 (O&M) Date of decision:22.07.2026 …Petitioner

...Respondents LINI SINGH NAGPAL te for the petitioner. yana. te for or respondent No.2. FIR No.224 dated 03.06.2025, f BNS, Police Station Pinjore, edings arising therefrom, on the d to be arrived at between the cted the parties to appear before cording of their statements with d order, parties appeared before Kalka, on 11.12.2025. Statement 118/PKL, A.E.F.U. Panchkula,

)

r s , , e e e h e t , KAPIL

was recorded Kalka, has s have entered relevant part 588-2025 (O&M) d on 18.12.2025. Learned Sub submitted his report recording into a valid compromise withou of the report as under has been s “ (i) Total Number of persons the dispute/F.I.R. As per the statement of In F.I.R. was filed against o Singh.

(ii) Number of complainant/v There is only one compl Sh. Anil Kumar.

(iii) Whether all the accused party to the compromise a Yes, the statements complainant/victim hav 11.12.2025 as directed by said parties signed on the

(iv) Statement of the Investiga Yes, the statement of In has been recorded (forw report).

(v) In case, any affected pers left out or not arrayed as before High Court, detail No. As per Investigating parties i.e. the Accused an

(vi) Whether any accused has offender/person or any su have been initiated or pen

None of the accused dec statement of Investigation stated that he has not been in any case. As per reco

Divisional Judicial Magistrate, satisfaction that all the parties ut any influence or coercion. The submitted: ns found involved as accused in Investigation Officer, the present one accused person i.e. Harman victim(s) lainant/victim i.e. Aditya son of d and complainant/victim(s) are and signed the same. s of the accused and ve been recorded on dated by the Hon'ble High Court. The e statement. ating Officer of the case. nvestigating Officer of the case warded as Annexure with the rson (accused or complainant) is as party in the quashing petition l whereof; ng Officer, there are only two nd the complainant. s been declared as a proclaimed uch proceedings against him/her nding adjudication? clared proclaimed person as per on Officer. Accused person also en declared as proclaimed person cord of the present F.I.R. case,

, s e n t n f e d d e e e s n o d r r o n , KAPIL

4. State counse dispute rega amicably res exercise in fu

5. Judgment of and another “Gian Singh petition is all 588-2025 (O&M) accused is not proclaime case.

(vii) Report of the Court wh voluntary and without any The compromise arrived b and accused person appea without any coercion o statements of the compla also recorded. The partie that they have entered in fear or pressure and ha against the accused is qua was duly confirmed.

(viii) Whether petitioner/s is inv As per statement of the accused is not involved in per statement of the accu against him.

(ix) Any other aspect relevant None.”

Reply filed by learned State cou l and learned counsel for respon rding the factum of compromi solved, continuation of the crim utility. Following principles of law l this Court in “Kulwinder Singh ” 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 h Versus State of Punjab and o lowed.

ed person in the present F.I.R. hether compromise is genuine, y coercion or undue influence? between the complainant/victim ars to be genuine, voluntary and or undue influence. Separate lainant as well as accused were ies in their statement submitted nto the compromise without any have no objection in case FIR uashed. Identity of all the parties volved in any other case? e investigating Officer, present in any other criminal case and as cused, no other F.I.R. is lodged t to the present case? unsel is taken on record. Learned ndent No.2 have not raised any ise. Since the matter has been minal proceedings would be an 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

R. , m d e e d y R s t s d d y n n h b n e KAPIL

6. 125(a), 125(b and all cons petitioner, on

7. 22.07.2026 Kapil 588-2025 (O&M) Consequently, FIR No.224 dat

b) and 281 of BNS, Police Sta sequential proceedings arising t n the basis of compromise dated Pending applications, if any, stan

Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Whether Reportable :

ted 03.06.2025, under Sections ation Pinjore, District Panchkula therefrom, are quashed qua the 28.10.2025. nd disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE

Yes/No

Yes/No

s a e

) KAPIL