1 CRM-M-16922-2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 139 CRM-M-16922-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 13.07.2026 SAURABH AHLAWAT AND OTHERS PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Harsh Sharma, Advocate for the applicants/petitioners. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG Haryana. Mr. Prajjwal Jaiswal, Advocate for Ms. Deipa Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** Shalini Singh Nagpal, J. (Oral) CRM-26934-2026 1. Application has been moved for preponement of the next date of hearing in the main petition from 24.09.2026 to an early date on the ground that the divorce petition for recording second motion statement of the parties is fixed for 01.09.2026 and as per agreement the FIR was required to be quashed. 2. Heard. 3. The application stands allowed. The main case is taken on board today itself. CRM-M-16922-2026 1. Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.401 dated 23.07.2023 under Sections 323, 506, 34 IPC Police Station Pinjore, District Panchkula and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 12.01.2026. HARPREET SINGH CHAUHAN 2026.07.14 19:03 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 CRM-M-16922-2026 (O&M) 2. On 07.04.2026, this Court directed the parties to appear before learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements with regard to compromise dated 12.01.2026. 3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, parties appeared before learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kalka on 17.04.2026. Statement of Investigating Officer ASI Vikrant No.107/PKL was recorded on 20.04.2026. Learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kalka has submitted his report recording satisfaction that all the parties have entered into a valid compromise without any influence or coercion. Point-wise report as under has been submitted: “(i) The Number of accused arrayed in the FIR and how many have appeared before it and have made statements and whether any accused is absconding/P.O. in the case. As per the case-file record and the statement of police officer, the present F.I.R. was filed against three accused persons i.e. Saurabh Ahlawat, Shree Ram Ahlawat and Smt. Kamlesh Ahlawat. All three of them have appeared before the court on dated 17.04.2026. As per record, statement of Accused persons, and the statement of appeared police officer, none of the Accused person is absconding or P.O. in the case. (ii) Name of the complainant and injured/aggrieved and whether all of them have appeared and made their statements in support of the compromise. As per the record and the statements recorded, there is only one complainant/victim i.e. Smt. Divya Nehra. She has appeared and suffered a separate statement on dated 17.04.2026 in support of the compromise. (iii) Stage of trial/proceedings pending? Challan had been filed and proceedings were fixed for arguments on application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. (Section 250 B.N.S.S., 2023) for discharge. (iv) If the compromise is genuine, voluntary, and out of the will of the parties? HARPREET SINGH CHAUHAN 2026.07.14 19:03 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 CRM-M-16922-2026 (O&M) Yes. The compromise arrived between the complainant/victim and accused persons appears to be genuine, voluntary, out of free Will, and without any coercion or undue influence. (v) Whether any other criminal case pending against the accused. As per statement of the accused persons and the police officer, no other criminal case is pending against the accused persons, except for which the matter is sought to be compromised.” 4. Learned State counsel and learned counsel for respondent No.2 have not raised any dispute regarding the factum of compromise. Since the matter has been amicably resolved, continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility. 5. Following principles of law laid down by the Full Bench Judgment of this Court in “Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another” 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others” (2012) 10 SCC 303, the petition is allowed. 6. FIR No.401 dated 23.07.2023 under Sections 323, 506, 34 IPC Police Station Pinjore, District Panchkula and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed qua the petitioners, on the basis of compromise dated 12.01.2026. 7. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 13.07.2026 HS.CHAUHAN Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No HARPREET SINGH CHAUHAN 2026.07.14 19:03 I agree to specified portions of this document