AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
MANISH AND ORS …PETITIONERS VERSUS
STATE OFOF HARYANA AND ORS ...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Rahul Deswal, Advocate for Mr. Sameer Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Aaditya Pal Singh, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Siddharth Gautam, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.
*** Shalini Singh Nagpal, J. (Oral)
Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.322 dated 31.07.2026 under Sections 115, 190, 191(3), 351(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Police Station Sector-65, District Gurugram, Haryana and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 07.08.2026.
On 19.08.2026, this Court directed the parties to appear before learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements with regard to compromise dated 07.08.2026.
In compliance of the aforesaid order, parties appeared before learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gurugram on 25.08.2026. Statement of Investigating Officer ASI Sanjay was also recorded on 25.08.2026. Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gurugram has submitted his report recording satisfaction that all the parties have entered into a valid CRM-M-46164-2026(O&M)
compromise without any influence or coercion. Point-wise report as under has been submitted:
“1)There are five accused persons arraigned in the aforesaid FIR.
2)All five accused have appeared before the Trial Court and made statements.
3)No additional accused has been added during investigation in the present FIR.
4)No accused person has been absoconder/proclaimed person(s).
5)No offence has been added or deleted during investigation after registration of FIR. 6) No investigation is pending against any accused and none of the accused has been declared innocent.
7)Name of complainant is Prayag Varshney and name of Injured is Shalini Gupta.
8)Yes, injured person Shalini Gupta and aggrieved person Prayag Varshney have appeared and their statements were recorded.
9)The Investigation officer of the case appeared and recorded his statement.
10)The present case as such is fixed for arguments on charge.
11)The court is satisfied that the compromise entered between the parties is genuine, voluntarily, without any coercion and without any undue influence.
CRM-M-46164-2026(O&M)
One criminal case is pending against the accused Manish, FIR No. 70/2019 u/s 186/332/353/34 IPC, 1860, PS Delhi Cantt., Delhi.”
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. Criminal antecedents of the accused cannot be sole consideration to decline quashing proceedings arising out of FIR.
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 and Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others”(2012) 10 SCC 303, the petition is allowed.
FIR No.322 dated 31.07.2026 under Sections 115, 190, 191(3), 351(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Police Station Sector-65, District Gurugram, Haryana and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed qua the petitioners, on the basis of compromise dated 07.08.2026.
Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL)
JUDGE 23.09.2026