Shyam Lal & ORS. v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16016-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: May 26th, 2025 Shyam Lal and others .....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

None for the petitioners.

Mr. Karan Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Abhay Chauhan, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.13 dated 30.01.2021 under Sections 3(1)(x), 3(1)(xiv) of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 147, 149, 323 and 506 of the IPC, registered at Police Station Raipur Rani, District Panchkula, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 12.12.2024 (Annexure P-6).

2.

Vide order dated 25.03.2025 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on 25.04.2025 to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between them.

3.

Report has since been received from learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Panchkula, in pursuance of the PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.05.26 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-16016-2025 (O&M) -2directions of this Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the private respondents 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 copies of the statements of the parties, 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 persons in the FIR in question. 6.

In view of the report of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Panchkula, 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. 7.

Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. May 26th, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.05.26 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh