Himanshu Yadav and Others v. State of Haryana and Another

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

¶1Present petition has been filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of FIR No.395 dated 18.9.2025 under Sections 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 115, 117(2), 190, 191(2) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Khedki Daula, District Gurugram and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 22.9.2025 (Annexure P-2). 2 On 29.9.2025, the following order was passed: 8The petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of FIR (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise having been effected between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all concerned are parties to the present petition in terms of the dicta of the Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in 8Rakesh Das Vs. State of Haryana and another9, Neutral Citation: 2024:PHHC;147654-1o

Not At th of re Mr. be t The com Afte man the a co com coer The afte ice of motion. his stage, Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, H espondent No.1-State of Haryana and Amit Kumar,, Advocate has filed vak taken on record. e parties are directed to get their s mpromise in the following manner: The parties shall appear befo concerned on 09.10.2025 or a Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recor as of the complainant qua the fa such appearance is made, the tr needful for recording the stateme compromise. It shall be open to th record the statements of the pa conferencing as deemed appropri

(ii) In case the statement is to be the parties concerned shall be du by their respective counsel, subj Officer.

(iii) The trial Court/Illaqa Ma statements of the parties recorded by the Court who would be some the Bar. In case the statement is such Commissioner/Advocate sh statements to the effect that the p he/she had recorded their statem had been duly identified by their to satisfaction of trial Court/Illaqa er recording the statements of all the nner, the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrat statements so recorded as to whether ompromise and as to whether the comp mpromise and has been effected witho rcion. e trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall a er seeking information from Investigat

(i) Whether there is any other acc this petition? Haryana has put in appearance on be d accepts notice. kalatnama for respondent No.2. The sa statements recorded qua the factum fore the trial Court/Illaqa Magist any date thereafter as fixed by t rding statements of the petitioner as w factum of compromise. As and when rial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall do ents of the parties qua the factum of he trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate to ei arties by physical process or by vi iate by the trial Court/Illaqa Magistra e recorded by way of video conferenc uly identified through video conferenc ject to the satisfaction of the Presid agistrate may also choose to get d through some Commissioner, appoin e Advocate having sufficient standing s recorded through some Commissio hall furnish an affidavit after record parties had appeared before him/her ents as per law and that the said par respective counsel. This shall be sub a Magistrate. affected parties in either of the afores te shall submit its report on the basi r all the affected parties have entered promise in question is found to be a v out there being any kind of influence also report as regards the following f ting Officer, concerned: cused other than the petitioner, arraye

ehalf ame m of trate trial well any the f the ther ideo ate. cing, cing ding the nted g at ner, ding and rties bject said is of into valid e or facts

The

04.1 The & H read

Pay for r

¶3Pur Judicial M As per the 8(i) pers

(ii) case

(iii) pers

¶4Lea having co impugned

¶5Rep Commissi by the lea been furn tandem w objection comprom

(ii) Whether there is any other c other than the respondents, array

(iii) Whether any accused has bee e report be submitted before this Co

11.2025.9 e petitioners are directed to deposit a s Haryana High Court Employees We ds thus: Account No.37167209613; IFSC Code: SBIN0050306; Branch Code: 50306; Bank: State Bank of India, High C yment of costs and production of recei recording of statements in the manner rsuant to the aforesaid order, re Magistrate, Gurugram has been r e report, the Trial Court has reco There is no other accused array son; There is no other complainant or e other than the complinant;

None of the accused pers son/proclaimed offender.9 arned counsel for respondent N ompromised and states that h d order is quashed. ply by way of affidavit of ioner of Police, Manesar, Gurug arned State counsel. The same b nished to learned counsel for the with the said reply, learned State in case the impugned order ised the matter amicably. complainant or affected/ aggrieved p ed in the petition? en declared Proclaimed Offender? ourt before the next date of hearing sum of ¹50,000/-as costs with the Pun elfare Association, Bank details whe Court Branch, Chandigarh ipt thereof shall be a condition preced r directed for hereinabove.9 eport dated 28.10.2025 from Ch received, which is taken on reco orded as follows:-

yed in this case other than the accu r affected/aggrieved party arrayed in sons are declared as proclaim No.2 admits the factum of par he has no objection in case Virender Singh, HPS, Assist gram has been filed in Court tod be kept on record. Copy thereof petitioner. Raising submissions e counsel has stated that he has is quashed as the parties h

arty i.e. njab reof dent hief ord. used this med rties the tant day has s in

¶6I ha through th

¶7Thi exercise o in non-co Punjab a State of P and anoth (Criminal The propo by Apex C ave heard learned counsel for th he records of the case. is Court and Apex Court has r of jurisdiction under Section 482 ompoundable offences in the c and another, 2012 (10) SCC 30 Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR her vs. State of Madhya Prades l Appeal No.1489 of 2012 deci osition of law that emerges from Court and this Court is:

(a) Power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. ves and is unaffected by Section 320

(b) However, wider the power g

(c) The underlining principle wh can be invoked to quash the pr between the parties in the matt predominantly of civil characte arising out of matrimonial relat

(d) The said power is not to involving heinous and serious offences like murder, rape, dac private in nature and have a ser

(e) Section 482 Cr.P.C. casts du interest of justice as well. It is upon the High Court, that Ape would not refuse to quash FIR FIR finds mention thereof. H injuries sustained, whether such parts of the body/nature of weap

(f) Such exercise at the hands of only after the evidence is collec sheet is filed/ charges framed cannot be carried out while the

(g) While quashing FIR in non-are private in nature, High antecedents of the accused, con he parties and have carefully go repeatedly dealt with the issue 2 of the Code to quash proceed cases of Gian Singh vs. State 03, Kulwinder Singh & others R (Criminal) 1052 and Ram Gop sh, 2021 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 3 ided on 29th of September, 202 m the aforesaid decisions rende sted with this Court is much wi 0 of the Code. greater the caution. hile exercising such power is tha roceedings recognizing comprom ters which are overwhelmingly a er like commercial transactions tionship or family disputes. be exercised in the prosecuti s offences of mental depravity coity etc. as such offences are rious impact on society. uty upon the High Court to adva s in recognition of this duty cas ex Court held that the High Co under Section 307 merely beca High Court can assess nature h injuries inflicted on vital/delic pons used etc. of High Court would be permissi cted after investigation and char d during the trial. Such exerc matter is still under investigatio -compoundable offences even wh Court is required to consi nduct of the accused and whether

one e of ding e of vs. opal 21). ered ider at it mise and s or ons or not nce sted ourt ause of cate ible rge-cise on. hich ider

CRM-M No.54768 of 2025 -5-

was absconding or whether he has managed the complainant to enter into a compromise.

¶8Thus, keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise jurisdiction vested u/s 528 of BNS, 2023 to quash the FIR as :-

(i) Putting a quietus to the proceedings will bring peace and tranquility amongst parties & will accordingly further the cause of substantial justice.

(ii) The offences alleged are primarily of private nature.

(iii) The parties have compromised.

(iv) As per the report received the compromise is said to be voluntary in its nature.

(v) Complainant/victim is reported to have entered into compromise on his own volition.

9 Consequently, the petition is allowed. FIR No.395 dated 18.9.2025 under Sections 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 115, 117(2), 190, 191(2) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Khedki Daula, District Gurugram and all consequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 22.9.2025, are, hereby, quashed qua the petitioners.

(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE

4.11.2025 Ashwani o o Whetherospeaking/reasoned:oo Yes/Noo o

CRM-M No.54768 of 2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.54768 of 2025 Date of decision : 4.11.2025 Himanshu Yadav and others &&&&.Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another &&.Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Govind Rana, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate, for respondent no.2 ---