Rinkle v. State Of Haryana And Another

1

  


  


 

!"

# $%&%!'( )*)  )

+,

))) %%!' - &

.//

/

  

 

))) &0!'# '

&

 (

1, ) /


.

/)  2

Present : Mr. Aniket, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Onkar Singh Wahla, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Mohit, Advocate, for Mr. B.B.S. Randhawa, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

.

/)  23 )

- 4

Prayer in the present petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for quashing of FIR No.246 dated 14.08.2025 under Sections 115, 333, 351(2), 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya

2 Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Ram Nagar Karnal, District Karnal, along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated 22.08.2025 (Annexure P2). Briefly summarized, the facts of the case are that the respondentcomplainant, Jiya, had been working with the petitioner for 9 months preceding the incident in question. Since the petitioner had misbehaved on a few earlier occasions, the complainant left her job. However, on the day of the incident, the petitioner abused the complainant and got into a scuffle, where he raised his hand on the complainant and her mother, when по one was at home. The present FIR was then got registered against the petitioner
However, with the intervention of the respectables, the parties have decided to compromise the matter.

Hence, the present petition. The parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate vide order dated 28.08.2025 of this Court, to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at between the parties and a report in this regard was called for. Pursuant to the said order, a report has been received from the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Karnal, vide Memo No.329 dated 16.10.2025.

    

  



           



 
    

    

  

   

  




 

  

   



 

   

 

3 

!
"

 !
   

  

   

         

   

             



   !
     

     



   #             $ 

     $ 

  

$ 

       

 !
"

% Reply already filed on behalf of the respondentState is taken on record. Learned State counsel does not dispute the factum of the compromise amongst the parties and does not have any serious objection to the resolution of the dispute amongst the parties. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 reiterates the settlement and his concurrence to the FIR and all the other consequential proceedings being quashed.

The broad principles for exercising the powers under Section 482, Cr.P.C (now Section 528 BNSS) were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of
  

            

 ! "" #$
. The relevant paragraphs are extracted as under: &'
&
(  )*+      $  , -   

     

        . 
/      $ $ 
     

  $ $   ,-


4 &'
+
 /  

    .      , - #     

      

     

 

     

  $   

     

    

   .         

 
0   

  $     

     (   1+2   -  - 

 3   &451
 / $   #     (   )*+ 

      
 &'
1
  

  $    

        #    6     .    (  )*+ ,-   

$   . $.   6     $
 &'
)
0    $  ,-   $



    6 78     .  78  

  


 &'
9
 /    $           

      #      

  

  

   

   

  

  

6    

   

 


 &'
'
 6  $   (  )*+

$   $   

   

 , -      

 

      
 , 

       

          

  

  

 #      

      

   
 (      

  



        
/  $                            
 &'
5
            

   

   $  

  $     

5       
 /  

          6        $   #    
 &'
*
 - 

        $   

   

   

 

     

  $ 

    

   

 

      #   $  

   

  
 &'
4
    ,-

#   

    $     $ 



       



 

 

  $  

 .

 &'
&2
 /   

 6               &'
*


 &'
4
 
 :       

 

   $;    (

    

  $     

      $  

 


 /, - $  .    # $     



 

         




 /  #          

         $ $   


% The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the matter of '% &'(   )   *+ ,

"" -( " ./$
, that the matters which can be categorized as personal in nature or in the matter in which the nature of injuries do not exhibit mental depravity or commission of an offence of such a serious nature that quashing of which would override public interest, the Court can quash the FIR in view of the settlement arrived at amongst the parties.

6 It is evident that in view of the amicable resolution of the issues amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings. The furtherance of the proceedings likely to be a waste of judicial time and there appears to be no chances of conviction. 10 The following relevant factors emerge from perusal of the case as well as the subsequent developments supplementing a case for invocation of the powers under Section 528 BNSS: (i) The incident pertains to a minor scuffle that took place between the petitioner and the complainant and her mother at the complainant's home.

(ii) The petitioner is in his 30s and continued criminal proceedings would have serious repercussions on the discharge of his social obligations as well as his career. (iii) The case is still at the initial stage as the FIR was registered in August 2025.

(iv) The offence in question cannot be said to be heinous or as an offence that would be shocking to the conscience of the society or public at large. It can also not be termed as one shocking to the conscience of the Court;

In view of the report of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Karnal and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in
 

             

 ! "" #$
, the instant petition is allowed. FIR No.246 dated 14.08.2025 under Sections 115, 333, 351(2), 79 of the Bharatiya

7 Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Ram Nagar Karnal, District Karnal, along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated 22.08.2025 (Annexure P2) entered between the parties. However, the same would be subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/ to be deposited by the petitioner with DHFWS SKS USERFEES CS OFFICE Panchkula, Account No.50100189689492, IFSC Code HDFC0004832, HDFC Bank, Sector 6, Panchkula, within two months from receipt of certified copy of this order. Petition is allowed in above terms.

$ 56 - 3   )

.

/)  2 -

-!-

  0 '1&2 3 425 0 '( 3 425