Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/25119/2026 of SANJAY AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER on 21 July 2026
(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (305) CRM-M-25119-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:-21.07.2026 SANJAY AND ANOTHER … Petitioners Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Raj
CRM-M-25119-2026 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-25119-2026 (O&M)
Date of Decision:-21.07.2026
SANJAY AND ANOTHER
… Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER
...Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL
Present:
Mr. Raj Kaushik, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. B.S. Saroha, DAG Haryana.
Mr. Sarvjeet Singh Thakur, Advocate
for the complainant/respondent No.2.
****
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. Instant petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, seeking quashing of the below detailed First Information Report (FIR), and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise dated 07.04.2026 (P-2), effected between the parties. DETAILS OF CRIMINAL CASE:- FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station
13.02.2026 115, 121(1), 125, 126, 190, 191(3), 221, 281, 351(3) of BNS, 2023 (corresponding Sections 323, 253, 336, 337, 338, 341, 149, 148, 186, 279 and 506 (part ii) of IPC Kharkhoda, District Sonipat
2. Vide order dated 05.05.2026, the affected parties were di- rected to appear before the learned Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compro- mise. POONAM 2026.07.22 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-25119-2026 (O&M) 2
3. Report has since been received from learned District and Sessions Judge, Sonipat, 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 in- deed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the private respon- dents 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 in original, along with its report.
5. Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioners and the private respondents are the only aggrieved person in the FIR in question.
6. In view of the report of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Sonipat, 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 Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed, qua the petitioners.
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) 21st July, 2026 JUDGE Poonam Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No POONAM 2026.07.22 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document