Manchikatla Manoj Krishna And ORS v. State Of Haryana And Another

CRM-M-62814-2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-62814-2024 Date of decision: 22.05.2026 MANCHIKATLA MANOJ KRISHNA & ORS .... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Geeta Rani, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. R.S. Narang, Advocate, Mr. Satbir Singh, Advocate and Ms. Ishita Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) The prayer in this petition is for quashing of an FIR No.74 dated 27.05.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC, 1860 at Police Station DLF-II, District Gurugram along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the petitioners and respondent No.2. 2.

Vide order dated 17.02.2025, this Court had directed the parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded with regard to the compromise dated 29.11.2022.

3.

The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was to submit a report in this regard giving certain details as enumerated in the said order. 4.

Pursuant to the order dated 17.02.2025 passed by this Court, the parties have appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, KUSUM 2026.05.22 19:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh

CRM-M-62814-2024 Gurugram and as per the report dated 15.05.2026 submitted to this Court, both the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. 5.

A perusal of the aforesaid report would show that the parties have effected a genuine compromise without there being any pressure, coercion or undue influence. In view of the compromise there is a remote possibility of the complaint coming forward to support the prosecution case. The powers under Section 482 Cr.PC can be exercised in such like situation in order to prevent unnecessary vagaries of criminal trial to be faced by the parties, when there are remote chances of conviction of the accused. The compromise in question is found to be fully in consonance with the direction issued by the Court in "Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543".

6.

In view of the aforesaid report of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurugram accompanied by statements of both the parties, the FIR No.74 dated 27.05.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC, 1860 at Police Station DLF-II, District Gurugram along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.

7.

Petition stands disposed of.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 22.05.2026 Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No KUSUM 2026.05.22 19:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh