Rajesh Sharma And Others v. State Of Haryana And Another

CRM-M-10296-2026 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-10296-2026 Date of decision : 29.05.2026 RAJESH SHARMA AND OTHERS ... PETITIONERS

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ... RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Balvinder Sangwan, Advocate for the petitioners. Dr. Malvika Singh, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Pushp Jain, Advocate for Mr. Shivam Grover, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking quashing of FIR No.168 dated 10.03.2025, under Sections 115,190,191(2),281,324(4),351(3) of BNS (Sections 190, 191(2) of BNS deleted later and Section 3(5) of BNS added later) registered at P.S. Palla District Faridabad, along with all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise deed dated 08.09.2025 (Annexure P-2). 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that with the intervention of the respectables of the Society, the matter has indeed been compromised between the parties. He has referred to the compromise (Annexure P-2), in this regard and prays for quashing of the aforesaid FIR. 3.

A Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.03.2026 had directed the parties to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the compromise.

SONIA GUGNANI 2026.05.29 16.49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-10296-2026 -24.

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the parties have appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Faridabad and got their statements recorded. A copy of report dated 06.05.2026 has been submitted to the effect that the compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence.

5.

Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2 has not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. 6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

7.

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. 8.

Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and FIR No.168 dated 10.03.2025, under Sections 115,190,191(2),281,324(4),351(3) of BNS (Sections 190, 191(2) of BNS deleted later and Section 3(5) of BNS added later) registered at P.S. Palla District Faridabad (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioner are hereby quashed subject to deposit of Rs.20,000/- towards costs with the High Court Legal Services Committee. 9.

Pending application, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. (H.S.GREWAL) 29.05.2026 JUDGE Sonia Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No SONIA GUGNANI 2026.05.29 16.49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh