-1- 388-CRM-M-12224-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-12224-2025 Date of decision: 02.04.2025 Anumod Sharma ….Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. Sandeep Chopra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Praveen Bhadu AAG, Haryana. Ms. Mandeep Kaur, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 to 4. ..… SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) Instant petition has been preferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (BNSS) seeking quashing of the FIR (Annexure P-1), and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise effected between the parties vide compromise/settlement deed dated 26.12.2024 (Annexure P-2) and dated 14.01.2025 (Annexure P-3). Details of the FIR are as under: - FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 458 06.12.2017 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC Sector 40, Gurugram, Haryana 2. With the intervention of respectables and elderly people of the society, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide PREETI 2025.04.08 13:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -2- 388-CRM-M-12224-2025 compromise/settlement deed dated 26.12.2024 (Annexure P-2) and dated 14.01.2025 (Annexure P-3), which is duly signed by them. The matter was referred to the Court below for recording of statements of the parties and to report with respect to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. 3. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurugram, vide report dated 29.03.2025 has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure. It is also reported that cost, so imposed, vide order dated 18.03.2025 has been deposited. 4. Respondents Nos. 2 to 4 are represented by their counsel and do not oppose the compromise having been effected between the parties. 5. In view of the aforesaid report of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurugram, and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another”, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and “Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another”, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose can be served by keeping with the criminal proceedings pending, since respondents have themselves compromised the dispute with the petitioner. 6. In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed. FIR No. 458 dated 06.12.2017, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sector 40, Gurugram, Haryana PREETI 2025.04.08 13:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -3- 388-CRM-M-12224-2025 (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioner. (SANJIV BERRY) 02.04.2025 JUDGE preeti i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No PREETI 2025.04.08 13:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document