CRM-M-45869-2017 and CRM-M-47526-2017 1 124 (2 cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-45869-2017 Manjit Kaur and another …...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another …...Respondents CRM-M-47526-2017 Manjit Kaur …...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another …...Respondent Decided on: 10.07.2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Surjit Singh Swaich, Advocate, Ms. Deepika, Advocate and Mr. Deepak K. Bishnoi, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Parshant, Advocate, Mr. Love Bishnoi, Advocate and Mr. Parth Goel, Advocate for respondent No. 2 **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (ORAL) 1. By way of this common order, both the above-mentioned petitions are being decided together as they arise out of the same FIR and common allegations. REENA 2026.07.13 09:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-45869-2017 and CRM-M-47526-2017 2 2. As per order dated 29.02.2016 passed by the then Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 3357 of 2016, the parties had already entered into compromise and thereupon both the sides were expected to withdraw their respective litigations from the Court concerned. The factum of compromise and agreed stand of the parties was recorded by the Court about 6 ½ years back and even today when the Court asked a specific question neither the petitioner's counsel Mr. S.S. Swaich, Advocate nor Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Parshant, Advocate, deny the said fact that parties had entered into compromise. However, Mr. Sekhon submits that except of respondent No. 2 namely Ms. Sudarpan Kaur in CRM-M-45869-2017, who only is an employee in the Trust , qua whom he has no clarity. 3. In view of the aforementioned, I am of the view that both the quashing petitions are pending before this Court since the year 2017 and no meaningful purpose or object seems to be achieved by the respective parties. Therefore, both the petitions are disposed of with the observation that in the next two months period, the concerned parties must take necessary steps for withdrawing of their respective litigations initiated by them and thereupon, if any application comes on record of the present petition retracting from the compromise, it would be examined thoroughly and if found of misusing the process of law by burdening the institution unnecessarily, heavy costs amount would be considered for its imposition. 4. However, it is made clear that if somebody is found to be working/posted as employee of the Trust, the main obligation would be considered REENA 2026.07.13 09:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-45869-2017 and CRM-M-47526-2017 3 qua the Trust only and not the party in person. 5. Let copy of the order be forwarded to the concerned Courts. 6. Both the petitions stand disposed of. 7. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected case. 10.07.2026 reena (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No REENA 2026.07.13 09:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh