412 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16389-2025 Date of decision: 22.04.2025 GAGANDEEP ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENTS CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present: - Mr. Nippun Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Durgesh Garg, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Mukesh Mehra, Advocate for respondent No.2. SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) By way of present petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, petitioner seeks quashing of FIR (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated 06.03.2025 (Annexure P-3) executed between the parties. Details of the FIR are as follows: FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 152 24.09.2022 385, 106 of IPC read with Section 66 and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2002 Bhargo Camp, District Jalandhar. 2. With the intervention of respectables and elderly people of the society, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide compromise/affidavit 06.03.2025 (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. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, vide report KANIKA 2025.04.23 11:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 412 CRM-M-16389-2025 2 dated 03.04.2025 has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure. A copy of Receipt of costs of Rs. 10,000/- has been placed on record in compliance of the order dated 26.03.2025. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 does not oppose the compromise having been effected between the parties. 4. In view of the report of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, 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 the criminal proceedings pending, since the respondents have themselves compromised the dispute with the petitioner/ accused person. 5. In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed. FIR No. 152 dated 24.09.2022 under Sections 385, 106 of IPC read with Section 66 and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2002, registered at Police Station Bhargo Camp, District Jalandhar, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioner. 22.04.2025 (SANJIV BERRY) kanika JUDGE i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No KANIKA 2025.04.23 11:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment