Allowed

Surender Singh and Others v. State of Haryana and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Oct 2024CRM-M/9779/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition seeking quashing of FIR registered under Section 67-A of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act on the basis of compromise between parties. Following Full Bench precedent, the FIR and subsequent proceedings were quashed qua petitioners.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.305 dated 11.6.2022 and all subsequent proceedings quashed qua petitioners.

Surender Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh

¶2

CRM-M-9779-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:-25.10.2024

¶3

Surender Singh and others … Petitioners

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Haryana and another ... Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

¶7

Present:Ms. Pooja Jaglan, for the petitioners. Mr. Vishal Kashyap, DAG, Haryana. Ms. Rashi Verma, Advocate for complainant/respondent No.2.

¶8

¶9

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral)

¶10

The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.305, dated 11.6.2022 registered at Police Station Thanesar City, District Kurukshetra, under Section 67-A of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise stated to have been effected between the parties.

¶11

Vide order dated 23.2.2024, the parties had been directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate so as to get their statements recorded qua the factum of compromise.

¶12

Report of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra, has been received, wherein it has been reported that statement of petitioners namely Surender Singh, Riya @ Rakhi, Sheela Devi and also of respondent No.2 namely

¶13

GEETA RANI 2024.10.28 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶14

CRM-M-9779-2024 (O&M) ( 2 )

¶15

Parveen Kumar and victim namely Satakshi have been recorded to the effect that they have compromised the matter amongst themselves.

¶16

Respondent No.2 namely Parveen Kumar and victim Satakshi in their statements have stated that they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

¶17

Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra has specifically opined that the parties have entered into compromise voluntarily and without any undue influence.

¶18

In view of the aforesaid compromise and bearing in mind the law laid down by Full Bench of this Court in 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab , the present petition is allowed and FIR No.305, dated 11.6.2022 registered at Police Station Thanesar City, District Kurukshetra, under Section 67A of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua petitioners.

¶19

25.10.2024 geeta		( Gu	rvinder Singh Gill ) Judge
	Whether reasoned/speaking	Yes / No
	Whether reportable	Yes / No

¶20

GEETA RANI 2024.10.28 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Surender Singh and Others v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surender Singh and Others v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harjinder Singh @ Jinda Vs State of Punjab

Amarjit Singh Alias Azad Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Mejar Singh Alias Major Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Nanak Singh Vs State of Punjab

Pritam Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others

Gurmeet Kaur Vs State of Haryana