Allowed¶27

Gajendra Pal Singh Malik v. State of Haryana and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Dec 2025CRM-M/40990/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRM-M-40990-2025, Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, decided 10.12.2025 by Justice Anoop Chitkara. Quashing of FIR on basis of compromise under Section 528 BNSS; FIR No. 169 dated 28.03.2010, PS Gurgaon City, District Gurugram, Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC; petitioner Gajendra Pal Singh Malik; private/family dispute qua plot between father and son; complainant (respondent No.2) consented to quashing; petitioner aged 82 years; parties bound by court statements; mention of pending case under Senior Citizen Act excluded from undertaking; non-reportable, reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 169 dated 28.03.2010 and all other consequent proceedings on the basis of compromise; parties bound by their statements before the Court. ¶27

Gajendra Pal Singh Malik Vs State of Haryana and Another — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CRM-M-40990-2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

210-2

¶4

CRM-M-40990-2025 Date of Decision: 10.12.2025

¶5

Gajendra Pal Singh Malik

¶6

......Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Haryana and another

¶9

......Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶11

Present: Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Shiva Khurmi, D.A.G., Haryana.

¶13

Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶14

¶15

ANOOP CHITKARA J.

¶16

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station	Sections
169	28.03.2010	Gurgaon City,	120-B, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC
		District Gurugram

¶17

Seeking quashing of FIR captioned above on the basis of compromise, the petitioner has come up before this Court under Section 528 BNSS.

¶18

On the last date of hearing, respondent No.2 who is complainant in the main FIR was present in person and states that he never wanted to send his father in prison and based on such statement, both the petitioner as well as respondent no.2 were called for today.

¶19

Today, both the petitioner and respondent No.2 are present in Court. Petitioner is accompanied by Ms. Divya Malik, Ms. Geetika Singh and Ms. Shashi Malik. Respondent No.2 is present with his wife Ms. Vijayata Malik and respondent No.2 states that he has no objection if FIR is quashed and set aside as they have settled the dispute.

¶20

On the interaction of the Court, petitioner submits that he is ready to withdraw all cases, including his name be treated as deleted from the array of parties if in any case, his name is in

¶21

�

¶22

JYOTI SHARMA 2025.12.11 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh

¶23

CRM-M-40990-2025

¶24

array of party as one of petitioner or respondent which is pending against the respondent, except one case filed by him under the Senior Citizen Act. Petitioner’s daughter, grand daughter and wife also consented to the undertaking.

¶25

Counsel for respondent No.2 on instructions submits that he has no objection if FIR is quashed.

¶26

Perusal of FIR and offence attracted reflect that it is a private dispute qua plot, as such criminal proceeding can be disrupted in such case based on compromise, as no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings. Moreover, petitioner is 82 years old man who is now on wheel chair and dispute is between father and son.

¶27

Given above, the present petition is allowed. FIR and all other consequent proceeding are quashed on the basis of compromise. Parties shall remain bound by their statement made before this Court. All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

¶28

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶29

10.12.2025 Jyoti Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No .

¶30

�

¶31

JYOTI SHARMA 2025.12.11 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh

Gajendra Pal Singh Malik v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajendra Pal Singh Malik v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S R.D. Trading Company Vs Renu Walia

Sanjeev Kamboj Vs Mayank Garg

Savita Vs Satish Rathi

Devender Singh Vs State of Haryana and Another

Gajendra Pal Singh Malik Vs State of Haryana and Another

Milap Singh Thakur Vs Rajinder Singh