Wednesday, 03, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Kapil And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 6051 P&H

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 6051 P&H
Judgement Date : 18 March, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Kapil And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another on 18 March, 2024

                                                                                 2024:PHHC:038576
                  CRM-M-49734-2019 (O&M)

                                                                                               1

                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                              CHANDIGARH
                  281
                                                                   CRM-M-49734-2019 (O&M)
                                                                   Date of Decision:-18.03.2024
                  Kapil and Ors.
                                                                                 ......Petitioners
                                                       Versus
                  State of Haryana and Anr.
                                                                               ......Respondents

                  CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN
                                        ****
                  Present:        Mr. J.K. Sehrawat, Advocate for the petitioners.

                                  Mr. Anmol Malik, DAG, Haryana.

                                  Mr. Zorawar Singh Chauhan, Advocate for respondent No.2

                                                     ****
                  ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral)

1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

seeking quashing of FIR No.324 dated 26.06.2018, under Sections 147,

148, 149, 186, 323, 325, 353, 427, 435, 506 of IPC and Section 25 of

Arms Act, 1959 and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public

Property Act 1984, registered at Police Station Hansi City, District

Hissar and subsequent proceeding arising therefrom on the basis of

compromise dated 30.09.2019 (Annexure P-2).

2. Keeping in view the fact that the parties entered into a

settlement, this Court vide order dated 25.01.2024 directed the parties to

appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for getting their statements

recorded in that regard. Pursuant thereto, a report dated 22.02.2024 has

been received from Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hansi stating that

the compromise arrived at between the parties is voluntary and the same is

without any pressure, coercion or undue influence.

2024:PHHC:038576 CRM-M-49734-2019 (O&M)

3. Learned State counsel and learned counsel appearing on behalf

of respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that they

have no objection in quashing of the FIR on that basis.

4. Perusal of the aforesaid report establishes that the parties have

amicably settled their dispute, and continuance of criminal proceedings in

such a situation will be an exercise in futility, as the chances of conviction

are bleak. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised in such

matters. It has been held by Supreme Court of India in cases Gian Singh v.

State of Punjab and another 2012(10) SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and

others v. State of Punjab and another 2014(6) SCC 406 that criminal cases

having overwhelmingly civil character, particularly those arising out of

commercial transactions or matrimonial relationships or family disputes,

should be quashed when the parties have resolved the disputes among

themselves in a bona fide manner.

5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "State of Madhya

Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan" (2019) 5 SCC 688, has upheld that the High

Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the criminal proceedings in

respect of non compoundable offences which are private in nature and do

not have serious impact on society.

6. More so, the trial would also be a futile exercise as there is no

cogent evidence to reach the conviction. Although the last part of the

argument is not sustainable, as the Courts are well within its powers to

proceed in the matter with the evidence available and merely because the

parties have compromised would not be a ground, the trial would be

2024:PHHC:038576 CRM-M-49734-2019 (O&M)

futility, however, considering the other aspect that the future of the

daughter of the petitioner will be capitalized.

7. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court

in the aforesaid judgment, the present petition stands allowed and FIR

No.324 dated 26.06.2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 186, 323, 325,

353, 427, 435, 506 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 and Section

3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act 1984, registered at

Police Station Hansi City, District Hissar and subsequent proceeding

arising therefrom, are hereby quashed qua the petitioners subject to costs of

Rs.10,000/- to be paid by each of the petitioner and Rs.25,000/- to be paid

by respondent No.2 within a period of two weeks from today in the

account of the Poor Patients Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh.

8. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.




                                                                      (ALOK JAIN)
                                                                        JUDGE
                  18.03.2024
                  manju

                                     Whether speaking/reasoned:-     Yes/No
                                     Whether Reportable:-            Yes/No








 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter