AJEET ALIAS JAGBIR AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
CRM-M/41096/2025 · 2026-03-19
Aaradhna Sawhney
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5774 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5774 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CRM-M-41096-2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
323
CRM-M-41096-2025
Date of decision: 19.03.2026
Ajeet @ Jagbir and others
...Petitioners
Versus State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY
Present : Mr. Kartar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vishal Singh, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Davinder Kaliraman, Advocate for Mr. S.K. Bishnoi, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4. ***** AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL)
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, seeking quashing of FIR No.281 dated 24.04.2025 registered under Sections 115, 126, 3(5), 351(3) BNS (challan filed u/s 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 351(3), 3(5), 238 BNS) at Police Station Palla, District Faridabad along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 16.07.2025 (Annexure P-2). 2. With the intervention of respectables and elderly persons of the society, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide compromise deed dated 16.07.2025 (Annexure P-2), 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. The learned trial Court vide report dated 02.12.2025 has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure. HAMANT 2026.03.20 19:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-41096-2025
2
3. Respondents No.2 to 4 is represented by his counsel, who admits the factum of compromise. 4. In view of the aforesaid report of the trial Court 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 complainant has himself compromised the dispute with the petitioners/ accused persons. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned hereinabove, the present petition is allowed. FIR No. 281 dated 24.04.2025 registered under Sections 115, 126, 3(5), 351(3) BNS (challan filed u/s 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 351(3), 3(5), 238 BNS) at Police Station Palla, District Faridabad and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioners.
(AARADHNA SAWHNEY)
JUDGE
19.03.2026 Hemant
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable
: Yes / No HAMANT 2026.03.20 19:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document