[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Akhtar Ali vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 11 December, 2025
CRM-M-44685-2024
CRM-M-45338-2024 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
306 CRM-M-44685-2024
AKHTAR ALI ......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS ......Respondents
CRM-M-45338-2024
FURKAN AND OTHERS ......Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS
......Respondents
Decided on :11.12.2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: Mr. Jamshed Ahmed, Advocate,
for the petitioner in CRM-M-44685-2024 and
for respondent Nos.2 to 8 in CRM-M-45338-2024.
Mr. Inderjeet Singh, Advocate,
for the petitioner in CRM-M-45338-2024 and
for respondent Nos.2 to 4 in CRM-M-44685-2024.
Mr. Pawan Kumar Jhanda, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
1. Petition i.e. CRM-M-44685-2024 has been filed for
quashing of DDR No.22(A) Dated 12.9.2014 Under Sections
148,149,323,324,506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered as Cross
case in FIR No.142 dated 15.8.2014 registered at Police Station:
Khizrabad, District Yamuna Nagar, and judgment of conviction u/s 323
and 326 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, in Case No.21-2020 dated
CRM-M-44685-2024
12.4.2023 passed by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, on the
basis of compromise dated 29.05.2023 (Annexure P-3).
Petition i.e. CRM-M-45338-2024 has been filed for
quashing of FIR No.142 dated 15.8.2014 under Sections
148,149,323,324,506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police
Station: Khizrabad, District Yamuna Nagar, and judgment of conviction
u/s 148,323,324,325,326,506 r/w 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, in
Case No. 66 of 2015 dated 12.4.2023 passed by Sub Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Bilaspur, on the basis of compromise dated 29.05.2023
(Annexure P-3).
2. Vide order dated 21.07.2025, the affected parties were
directed to appear before the learned Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for
getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the
compromise.
3. Report has since been received from learned Sub Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, in pursuance to the directions of this Court
wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties
stands verified and confirmed. As per the report(s), compromise has
indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any
pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the private respondents
have also made statement to the effect that they would have no objection
if the FIR as well as DDR qua the accused-petitioners is quashed.
4. The trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties in
original, along with its report. The relevant part of the said report is
reproduced herebelow:
CRM-M-44685-2024
Sr. Description
No.
1. Total number of persons 37 accused
found involved as accused in
the dispute/FIR
2. Number of Seven victims/complainant
complainant/victim(s)
3. Whether all the accused and Yes
complainant / victims are
party to compromise &
signed the same
4. In case, any affected No complainant/accused has been left out
person(accused or in the petition and all have been arrayed
complainant) is left out or not as party in the petition.
arrayed as party in the
quashing petition before High
Court, detail whereas; Or
His/her statement is till to be
recorded, in compliance to the
direction of this Court,
details of such person
5. Whether any accused has No
been declared as a proclaimed
offender/person or any such
proceedings against him/her
have been initiated or pending
adjudication
6. Report of the Court whether Yes
compromise is genuine,
voluntary, and without any
coercion or undue influence
7. Any other aspect relevant to Nothing worth noticing reported
the present case.
5. Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other
accused other than the petitioners and the private respondents are the
only aggrieved person in the FIR in question.
6. In view of the report of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Bilaspur, and the principles laid down by Hon'ble the Apex
Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303,
CRM-M-44685-2024
and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others
Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the
instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR as well as DDR and all
consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed.
7. Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms
of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below
8. Both the petitions stand disposed of.
9. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other
connected case.
11.12.2025 (SANJAY VASHISTH)
Lavisha JUDGE
Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO
Whether Reportable: YES/NO
