High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/66340/2025disposed of

Dushyant And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

2026-03-06Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 06.03.2026 DUSHYANT AND OTHERS .... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

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

Present:

Mr. Punit Malik, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Vipul Sherwal, AAG Haryana.

Mr. Pardeep Balyan, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) The prayer in this petition is for quashing of an FIR No.401 dated 22.10.2024 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 115, 126, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) of BNS, 2023 at Police Station City Sohna, District Gurugram (Haryana) later on challan was presented under Sections 115, 117(4), 156, 140(3), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) and 110 of BNS, 2023 along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the petitioners and respondent Nos.2 and 3. Vide order dated 27.11.2025, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had directed the parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded with regard to the compromise dated 15.11.2025

(Annexure P-2).

The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was to submit a report in this regard giving certain details as enumerated in the said order. Pursuant to the order dated 27.11.2025 passed by this Court, the parties have appeared before the learned District and Session Judge, Gurugram and as per the report dated 19.12.2025 submitted to this Court, both the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. 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".

In view of the aforesaid report of the learned District and Session Judge, Gurugram accompanied by statements of both the parties, the FIR No.401 dated 22.10.2024 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 115, 126, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) of BNS, 2023 at Police Station City Sohna, District Gurugram (Haryana) later on challan was presented under Sections 115, 117(4), 156, 140(3), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) and 110 of BNS, 2023

along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.

Petition stands disposed of.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 06.03.2026 Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No