IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 392 CRM-M-15280-2025 Date of decision: 21.05.2025 Manjeet Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present : Mr. Manjeet Singh, Advocate for Mr. Amit Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Karan Sharma, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Davinder Kaliraman, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) 1. The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.245 dated 02.07.2021 under Sections 279, 337 of the IPC (Section 338 of the IPC added lateron) registered at Police Station Matlauda, District Panipat and all consequential proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of compromise dated 12.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) arrived at, between the parties. 2. Reply by way of affidavit of Rajbir Singh, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, City, Panipat, on behalf of respondent No.1- State, has been filed in the Court today which is taken on record subject to all just exceptions. A copy of the same has been supplied to the VINAY 2025.05.21 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-15280-2025 -2- counsel opposite. 3. Vide order dated 20.03.2025 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on 21.04.2025 to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at, between them. 4. Report has since been received from learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat, 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 compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the complainant has also made statement to the effect that he would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioner is quashed. 5. The Trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties in original, alongwith its report. 6. Learned State counsel too submits that there is 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat and the principles laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. 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 petitioner. VINAY 2025.05.21 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-15280-2025 -3- 8. Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. 21.05.2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Vinay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VINAY 2025.05.21 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment