327. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-4815-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.03.2025 Pankaj and others ..... Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present: Mr. Hitesh Verma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Gagandeep Singh Chhina, AAG, Haryana, for respondent No.1. Ms. Amarinder Kaur, Advocate, Advocate, for respondent No.2. ------ MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) CRM-3356-2025 Application is allowed, as prayed for. CRM-M-4815-2025 1. Prayer in the instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.73, dated 10.12.2021, under Sections 419, 420, 120-B, 467, 468, 471, 201 of IPC and Sections 66C, 66D of IT Act, 2000, registered at Police Station Cyber Crime NIT, Faridabad (Annexure P-1), and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 08.01.2025 (Annexure P-2) arrived at, between the parties. 2. Vide order dated 28.01.2025 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.03.27 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4815-2025 (O&M) - 2 - 27.02.2025 to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between them. 3. Report has since been received from learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad, in pursuance of the directions of this Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report, petitioner No.3-Abdullah @ Raja Bhaiyaa, petitioner No.1-Pankaj and petitioner No.2-Sonveer Rathore @ Sonu are involved in four other criminal cases, whereas the petitioner No.4- Rahul is involved in two other cases. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no doubt, the FIRs, which are mentioned in the report received from the learned JMIC, Faridabad, were indeed registered against the petitioners, however, it is a matter of record that in all these cases, the parties have compromised and on the basis of compromise, either the FIRs in question have been quashed or directions have been issued by this Court for recording of their statements in support of amicable settlement effected. 5. The trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties in original, alongwith its report. 6. Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioner and respondent No.2 is the only aggrieved person in the FIR in question. 7. In view of the report of learned trial Court and the principles laid down by Hon’ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.03.27 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4815-2025 (O&M) - 3 - Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed qua petitioners. 8. Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE March 26, 2025 sanjeev Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.03.27 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document