Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40304 (PNJ)

NIKHIL KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

CRM-M/17368/2025 · 2025-07-10

Manisha Batra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-17368 of 2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 299 CRM-M-17368 of 2025 Date of Decision: 10.07.2025 Nikhil Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Karan Singh, Advocate, for Mr. Sushil Kamboj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Surender Singh, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Deepak Chauhan, Advocate, for Mr. Shiv Narayan, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** Manisha Batra, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short-‘BNSS’) for quashing of FIR No.550, dated 18.05.2020 under Section 67 of the Information & Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, registered at Police Station Ambala City, District Ambala and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 20.03.2025 (Annexure P-2). 2. This Court vide order dated 21.05.2025 had directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the compromise. DINESH BANSAL 2025.07.11 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-17368 of 2025 -2- 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has submitted report dated 08.07.2025 to the effect that the compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. 4. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. 5. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. 6. Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and FIR No.550, dated 18.05.2020 under Section 67 of the Information & Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, registered at Police Station Ambala City, District Ambala and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 20.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) are quashed qua the petitioner. (MANISHA BATRA) 10.07.2025 JUDGE D.Bansal Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/ No Whether Reportable : Yes/ No DINESH BANSAL 2025.07.11 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh