CRM-M-22656-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 168+331 CRM-M-22656-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.07.2026 Chandrasekar Ruthrappa ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Varun Varma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A. K. Khubbar, Addl. A.G., Haryana. Mr. Rahul Yadav, 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 quashing of FIR No. 64 dated 07.03.2025, registered under Sections 318(4) and 319 of BNS, 2023 at Police Station Cyber South, Gurugram, District Gurugram. 2. Though the present petition was originally filed seeking quashing of the aforementioned FIR on merits, however, vide order dated 30.04.2026, learned counsel for the parties had submitted that there were chances of an amicable settlement between the petitioner and respondent No. 2/complainant. Accordingly, the matter was referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. Thereafter, vide order dated 20.05.2026, a report was received from the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and a settlement/agreement dated 18.05.2026 had been reduced into writing. The same is available on the file of the case. MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.17 10:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22656-2026 (O&M) -2- 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the dispute stands amicably settled between the parties, the present petition deserves to be allowed, thereby quashing the impugned FIR along with all the subsequent proceedings having emanated therefrom. 4. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has not disputed the factum of compromise having arrived at between the parties. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has specifically submitted that he has no objection if the present petition is allowed and the impugned FIR is quashed. 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. 64 dated 07.03.2025, registered under Sections 318(4) and 319 of BNS, 2023 at Police Station Cyber South, Gurugram, District Gurugram is hereby quashed qua the petitioner along with all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. 7. Needless to say, the parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions as mentioned in the aforementioned settlement/agreement. 8. Pending application, if any, shall be treated as disposed of. 16.07.2026 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.17 10:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document