Satish And Another vs State Of Haryana And Another

Sanjay Vashisth, J

Instant petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, seeking quashing of the below detailed First Information Report (FIR), and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise (Annexure P-2), effected between the parties.

DETAILS OF CRIMINAL CASE:-

FIR No.

Date

Section(s)

Police Station

74

04.02.2018

25/54 of the Arms Act & Section 285/323/34/452/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

Sadar Palwal, District Palwal

On 16.09.2025, the following order was passed:

(i) Prayer in the present petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for quashing of FIR No.74 dated 04.02.2018 under Sections 25/54 of the Arms Act & Section 285/323/34/452/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Sadar Palwal, District Palwal and along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2).

(ii) Counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that the dispute in the main case i.e. in FIR No.74 dated 04.02.2018 impugned herein, has been resolvedamicably and parties have agreed to get the proceedings quashed.

(iii) Notice of motion.

(iv) Dr. (Ms.) Malvika Singh, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State and prays for some time to file the reply/status report.

(v) Mr. K.S. Siwach, Advocate enters appearance and files power of attorney on behalf of respondent No.2 and he does not dispute the fact that the matter has been compromised between the parties. The power of attorney is taken on record. Registry is directed to do the needful.

(vi) The affected parties are directed to appear before the learned Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise on or before 28.10.2025 and subject to the petitioners' depositing costs of Rs. 10,000/- each with "Haryana State Disaster Response Fund, Account No. 39681102475, IFSC-SBIN0010603, State Bank of India, New Haryana Civil Secretariat Branch, Sector-17, Chandigarh",. Thereupon, the concerned Court shall submit a detailed report, containing the information on the following points, along with copies of the statements to this Court, on or before the adjourned date:-

i. Total number of persons found involved as accused in the dispute/FIR;

ii. Number of complainant/victim(s);

iii. Whether all the accused and complainant / victims are party to compromise & signed the same;

iv. In case, any affected person (accused or complainant) is left out or not arrayed as party in the quashing petition before High Court, detail whereof; OR

His/her statement is still to be recorded, in compliance to the direction of this Court, details of such person;

v. Whether any accused has been declared as a proclaimed offender/person or any such proceedings against him/her have been initiated or pending adjudication;

vi. Report of the Court whether compromise is genuine, voluntary, and without any coercion or undue influence;

vii. Any other aspect relevant to the present case.

(vii) To come up on 01.12.2025, awaiting report.

(viii) Reply by the respondent-State, if any, be filed on or before the next date of hearing.

Report dated 04.11.2025 has been received from learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palwal, 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 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 qua the accused-petitioners is quashed.

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 herein below:

"From the statements the parties, it makes out that the parties of the present case have compromised the matter with their free will and without any fraud or coercion or undue influence. So this compromise between the parties appears to be genuine.

The further information as desired is as follows :-

i). According to police record, there were three persons namely Satish, Dharmender and Nijju who were arraigned as accused in the FIR. One accused namely Nijju was found innocent during investigation;

ii). According to police record, there is only one complainant namely Sedan and except the complainant, there is no other victim in the present FIR;

iii). As per the statement of parties, both accused and complainant are party to the compromise and signed the same;

iv). According to the police record, there is no other affected person left out or not arrayed as party in quashing petition;

v). According to the police record, it comes out that no accused is declared proclaimed offender in the case and no such proceedings against them have been initiated or pending adjudication;

Learned State counsel does not dispute the aforesaid factual position and affirms the same during the course of arguments.

In view of the report of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palwal and the principles laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, 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 and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed.

Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below.

Before parting with the order, it is observed that in case there is any objection to any of the parties in allowing the petition or terms of the compromise, they can file application for recalling/revival of the order within 60 days.

Petition stands disposed of.