Vishal Kandhol And Another v. State Of Haryana And Another

earned counsel for the petitioners has contended that in the present case, the complainant has entered into compromise with the complainant on 13.08.2025. In support of his abovementioned arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the principles of law

laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'Ramgopal & Anr Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2022(14) SCC 531, and laid down by this Court in the cases of 'Anil Kumar & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Anr.' CRM-M-53399-2018, 'Gurmej Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.' CRM-M31995-2025, and that the present petition be allowed in terms of compromise and the FIR should be quashed, accordingly.

3.

In the case of Ramgopal (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has observed that 'the jurisdiction of a Court under Section 320 CrPC

cannot be construed as a proscription against the invocation of inherent powers of the High Courts under Section 482 CrPC. 8.

It has been further held that the touchstone for exercising the extraordinary powers under Section 482 CrPC, would be to do complete justice and therefore, this Court or the High Court, as the case may be, after having given due regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that the victim/complainant has willingly entered into a settlement/compromise, can quash proceedings in exercise of their respective constitutional/inherent powers'.

n the case of Anil Kumar (supra), this Court while quashing of FIR under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 341, 506 of IPC, Section 25 of Arms Act, and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, held that continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law and the compromise would bring peace and harmony.

10.

Similarly, in the case of Gurmej Singh (supra), this Court while quashing of FIR under Sections 127(2), 351(2), 324(2) of BNS, 2023, and sections 3(1)(R) and 3(1) of SC/ST Act, has held that the FIR and consequential proceedings can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties in cases predominantly of civil nature, where the offences alleged are private in nature, and the compromise is voluntarily without coercion or undue influence.

11.