CRM-M-21418-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 229 ASHOK KUMAR AND ANOTHER STATE OF CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Shalini Singh Nagpal, J. (Oral) 1. under Sections Panipat, Haryana basis of compromise dated in the FIR during investigation. 2. learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements with regard to compromise dated 3. learned Judicial Magistrat Investigating Officer 1 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ASHOK KUMAR AND ANOTHER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Mr. Manvender Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Kshitij Bharti, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Mohit Kakkar, Advocate For respondents No.2 and 3. *** Shalini Singh Nagpal, J. (Oral) Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. under Sections 323, 34 and 506 IPC, 1860 Police Station Panipat, Haryana and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 03.04.2026. Section 325 of IPC has been added in the FIR during investigation. On 21.04.2026, this Court directed the parties to appear before learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements with regard to compromise dated 03.04.2026. In compliance of the aforesaid order, parties appeared before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat Investigating Officer ASI Sunil Kumar IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21418-2026 Date of decision: 11.09.2026 …PETITIONERS AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Manvender Chauhan, Advocate Mr. Kshitij Bharti, AAG, Haryana. quashing of FIR No.397 dated 16.09.2021 Police Station Matlauda, District and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the Section 325 of IPC has been added this Court directed the parties to appear before learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements with In compliance of the aforesaid order, parties appeared before e First Class, Panipat on 06.06.2026. Statement of ASI Sunil Kumar was recorded on 04.07.2026. .2026 16.09.2021 Matlauda, District and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the Section 325 of IPC has been added this Court directed the parties to appear before learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements with In compliance of the aforesaid order, parties appeared before Statement of . JYOTI 2026.09.11 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-21418-2026 Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat recording satisfaction that all the parties have entered into a valid compromise without any influence or coercion. Point has been submitted: persons in the prese Lahna Singh and Sh. Dheeraj son of Sh. Ashok Kumar. person (accused or complainant) is left out/not arrayed as party 2 2026 Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat recording satisfaction that all the parties have entered into a valid compromise without any influence or coercion. Point has been submitted: “1.As per report of Investigating Officer, there are two accused persons in the present FIR namely Sh. Ashok Kumar son of Sh. Lahna Singh and Sh. Dheeraj son of Sh. Ashok Kumar. 2. As per report of Investigating Officer, there are two complainant/victims in the present FIR namely Sh. Rajesh Kumar son of Sh. Lahna Singh and Sh. Aman Kumar Rajesh Kumar. 3. All the complainant/victims and accused persons are party to the compromise deed but complainant Sh. Aman Kumar is represented through Special Power of Attorney i.e. his mother namely Smt. Saroj wife of Sh. Rajesh Kumar, r/o vi Matlauda, District Panipat. They are all parties before the Hon’ble High Court in the quashing petition. Smt. Saroj wife of Sh. Rajesh Kumar has signed on the compromise deed Ex.PX on behalf of Sh. Aman Kumar (injured) and original Special Power of Attorney (Ex.PY) is on record. 4. As per the report of Investigating Officer, no other affected person (accused or complainant) is left out/not arrayed as party in the quashing petition before the Hon’ble High Court. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat, has submitted her report recording satisfaction that all the parties have entered into a valid compromise without any influence or coercion. Point-wise report as under As per report of Investigating Officer, there are two accused nt FIR namely Sh. Ashok Kumar son of Sh. Lahna Singh and Sh. Dheeraj son of Sh. Ashok Kumar. 2. As per report of Investigating Officer, there are two complainant/victims in the present FIR namely Sh. Rajesh Kumar son of Sh. Lahna Singh and Sh. Aman Kumar son of Sh. 3. All the complainant/victims and accused persons are party to the compromise deed but complainant Sh. Aman Kumar is represented through Special Power of Attorney i.e. his mother namely Smt. Saroj wife of Sh. Rajesh Kumar, r/o village Matlauda, District Panipat. They are all parties before the Hon’ble High Court in the quashing petition. Smt. Saroj wife of Sh. Rajesh Kumar has signed on the compromise deed Ex.PX on behalf of Sh. Aman Kumar (injured) and original Special ttorney (Ex.PY) is on record. 4. As per the report of Investigating Officer, no other affected person (accused or complainant) is left out/not arrayed as party in the quashing petition before the Hon’ble High Court. report recording satisfaction that all the parties have entered into a valid wise report as under As per report of Investigating Officer, there are two accused nt FIR namely Sh. Ashok Kumar son of Sh. 2. As per report of Investigating Officer, there are two complainant/victims in the present FIR namely Sh. Rajesh son of Sh. 3. All the complainant/victims and accused persons are party to the compromise deed but complainant Sh. Aman Kumar is represented through Special Power of Attorney i.e. his mother llage Matlauda, District Panipat. They are all parties before the Hon’ble High Court in the quashing petition. Smt. Saroj wife of Sh. Rajesh Kumar has signed on the compromise deed Ex.PX on behalf of Sh. Aman Kumar (injured) and original Special 4. As per the report of Investigating Officer, no other affected person (accused or complainant) is left out/not arrayed as party JYOTI 2026.09.11 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-21418-2026 pending against the accused persons for declaring them as proclaimed offender/person and they have not been declared as 4. factum of compromise. Since the matter has been amicably resolved, continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility. 5. Judgment of this C and another” 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 “Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others”(2012) 10 SCC 303, petition is allowed. 6. 325 IPC, 1860 3 2026 5. As per the report of Investigating pending against the accused persons for declaring them as proclaimed offender/person and they have not been declared as such by any Court. 6. With respect to the genuineness, authenticity and veracity of the compromise, it is submitted that parties were questioned orally whether they are voluntarily settling the matter to which they replied in the affirmative. Further, from the demeanor of the parties also they did not appear to be under any coercion or undue influence. Therefore, prima compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine, voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. 7. There is no other aspect relevant to the present case worth reporting.” Learned State counsel has 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. 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 “Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others”(2012) 10 SCC 303, petition is allowed. FIR No.397 dated 16.09.2021 under Sections IPC, 1860 Police Station Matlauda, District Panipat, Haryana 5. As per the report of Investigating Officer, no proceedings are pending against the accused persons for declaring them as proclaimed offender/person and they have not been declared as 6. With respect to the genuineness, authenticity and veracity of ubmitted that parties were questioned orally whether they are voluntarily settling the matter to which they replied in the affirmative. Further, from the demeanor of the parties also they did not appear to be under any coercion or e, prima-facie it appears that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine, voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. 7. There is no other aspect relevant to the present case worth 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. Following principles of law laid down by the Full Bench “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 under Sections 323, 34, 506 and Matlauda, District Panipat, Haryana and all Officer, no proceedings are pending against the accused persons for declaring them as proclaimed offender/person and they have not been declared as 6. With respect to the genuineness, authenticity and veracity of ubmitted that parties were questioned orally whether they are voluntarily settling the matter to which they replied in the affirmative. Further, from the demeanor of the parties also they did not appear to be under any coercion or facie it appears that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine, 7. There is no other aspect relevant to the present case worth not raised any dispute regarding the factum of compromise. Since the matter has been amicably resolved, Following principles of law laid down by the Full Bench “Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and Hon’ble Supreme Court in the and and all JYOTI 2026.09.11 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-21418-2026 consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed qua the on the basis of compromise dated 7. 11.09.2026 Jyoti-V 4 2026 consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed qua the on the basis of compromise dated 03.04.2026. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Whether Reportable : consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed qua the petitioner, 03.04.2026. any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No , (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JYOTI 2026.09.11 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document