Allowed¶37

Webcrowd Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 May 2025CRM-M/8834/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRM-M-8834-2025, decided 19.05.2025 (Sandeep Moudgil, J.): quashing of FIR No. 202 dated 12.11.2024, Section 318(4) BNS 2023, Cyber Crime Police Station Panipat, on compromise dated 11.01.2025 verified genuine by JMFC Panipat report dated 07.05.2025; petition under Section 528 BNSS 2023 allowed qua petitioner Webcrowd Solutions Pvt. Ltd.; relies on Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 (FB), Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, and Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; FIR No. 202 dated 12.11.2024 (Section 318(4) BNS 2023, Cyber Crime Police Station Panipat, Haryana) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 11.01.2025. ¶37

Webcrowd Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 202 dated 12.11.2024 under Section 318(4) of BNS 2023 registered at Cyber Crime Police Station Panipat, Haryana, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, should be quashed on the basis of the compromise dated 11.01.2025 arrived at between the parties. +1 more

¶17

Court's answer

In view of the amicable resolution of the issues amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings.

¶35

Ratio / Principle

Acting on the report dated 07.05.2025 of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat, the court accepted that the parties had entered into a compromise which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.

¶22

Key takeaways

FIR No. 202 dated 12.11.2024 under Section 318(4) of BNS 2023 registered at Cyber Crime Police Station Panipat, Haryana, and all the subsequent proceedings arising thereof on the basis of the compromise dated 11.01.2025, are quashed qua the petitioner(s).ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (Sandeep Moudgil, J.) allowed a petition under Section 528 BNSS 2023 and quashed FIR No. 202 dated 12.11.2024 under Section 318(4) of BNS 2023 registered at Cyber Crime Police Station Panipat, Haryana, along with all subsequent proceedings, qua petitioner Webcrowd Solutions Pvt. Ltd., on the basis of a compromise dated 11.01.2025 between the parties. The genuineness and voluntariness of the compromise was confirmed by the report dated 07.05.2025 of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat, and counsel for respondent No. 2 raised no objection. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Kulwinder Singh (2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052) and the Supreme Court decisions in Gian Singh ((2012) 10 SCC 303) and Parbatbhai Aahir ((2017) 9 SCC 641), the court held that in view of the amicable resolution no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.

¶1

271

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

¶3

AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-8834-2025 DECIDED ON: 19.05.2025

¶5

WEBCROWD SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.

¶6

.....PETITIONER(s)

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR

¶9

.....RESPONDENT(s)

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

¶11

Present: Mr. Prateek Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Ms. Mayuri Lakhanpal Kalia, DAG, Haryana.

¶13

Mr. Ashwani Vaishav, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

¶14

¶15

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

¶16

This is a petition under Section 528 BNSS 2023 for quashing of FIR No. 202 dated 12.11.2024 under Section 318(4) of BNS 2023 registered at Cyber Crime Police Station Panipat, Haryana (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising thereof on the basis of compromise dated 11.01.2025 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.

¶17

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.

¶18

Vide order dated 22.04.2025, parties were directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the genuineness of the compromise was called for.

¶19

Anuradha 2025.05.21 05:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CRM-M-8834-2025

¶21

¶22

The report dated 07.05.2025 has been received from Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat, stating that the parties have entered into a compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.

¶23

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that he has no objection if the petition is allowed.

¶24

Full Bench of this Court in ‘ Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052’ , has held:-

¶25

“ The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in noncompoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.

¶26

The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined parameters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.”

¶27

The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the judgment

¶28

were also approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of ' Gian

¶29

Singh Versus State of Punjab and another,(2012) 10 SCC 303'.

¶30

Furthermore, the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section

¶31

Anuradha 2025.05.21 05:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶32

CRM-M-8834-2025

¶33

¶34

482 were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of ' Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others versus State of Gujarat and another” (2017) 9 SCC 641 '.

¶35

It is evident that in view of the amicable resolution of the issues amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings. The furtherance of the proceedings is likely to be a waste of judicial time and there appears to be no chances of conviction.

¶36

In view of above, FIR No. 202 dated 12.11.2024 under Section 318(4) of BNS 2023 registered at Cyber Crime Police Station Panipat, Haryana (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising thereof on the basis of compromise dated 11.01.2025 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties, is quashed qua the petitioner(s).

¶37

The present petition is hereby allowed.

¶38

(SANDEEP MOUDGIL) 19.05.2025 JUDGE anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶39

Anuradha 2025.05.21 05:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Webcrowd Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Webcrowd Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahinder Kaur Alias Tindo Vs State of Punjab

Harpreet Singh Vs State of Haryana

Jassa Singh Vs State of Punjab

Naresh Kumar and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Bhupinder Kaur and Another Vs State of Haryana

Manjeet Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.