Balvinder Singh And Another v. State Of Haryana And Another

CRM-M-13911-2025 (O&M) -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-13911-2025 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 17.03.2025 Balvinder Singh and Another .....PETITIONERS

VERSUS

State of Haryana and Another .

..RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL

Present:

Mr. Vishwajeet, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Ms. Ankita Ahuja, AAG, Haryana.

**** H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL)
1.

By way of this petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.721 dated 25.12.2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 354, 34, 506 IPC, 1860 (later on Section 354 IPC deleted) registered at Police Station Sector-32-33, District Karnal on the basis of compromise deed dated 27.02.2025 (Annexure P2), whereby they claim to have settled their differences with respondent No.2. 2.

Notice of motion.
3.

Ms. Ankita Ahuja, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State whereas Mr. Sawan Chaudhary, Advocate has put in appearance by way of filing Power of Attorney on behalf of respondent No.2.
4.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 confirms the factum of the compromise having been effected between the parties and states that respondent No.2 has no objection to the quashing of the FIR in question. Sonia Puri 2025.03.20 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-13911-2025 (O&M) -2-



5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that one more case bearing FIR No.643 under Sections 506, 448 IPC, 1860 registered at Police Station Sector 32-33, Karnal is pending against the petitioner but he is on bail in that case. 6.

Learned State counsel has stated no objection in case the FIR is quashed based upon the compromise.

7.

In that view of the matter, even if this case is taken to its logical conclusion, it would only be an exercise in futility as the parties have already settled their differences. Therefore, no purpose would be served in wasting the time and resources of the State in pursuing this case to its pre-ordained end. It would, therefore, be better to give a quietus to the issue at this stage. Furthermore, the pendency of another FIR does not necessarily prevent the court from quashing the FIR in question, as long as the grounds for quashing are valid. 8.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and FIR No.721 dated 25.12.2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 354, 34, 506 IPC, 1860 (later on Section 354 IPC deleted) registered at Police Station Sector-32-33, District Karnal, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom shall stand quashed.
(H.S. GREWAL) 17.03.2025 JUDGE Sonia Puri Whether speaking/ reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No
Sonia Puri 2025.03.20 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document