Allowed

Neeraj Yadav and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CRM-M/31224/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a petition for quashing an FIR and consequent proceedings. The court accepted a Magistrate's report confirming a valid, voluntary compromise between the petitioners and other parties, citing case law on compromise in criminal matters.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.58 dated 13.03.2026 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom were quashed qua the petitioners.

Neeraj Yadav and Others Vs State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

CRM-M-31224-2026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

275

¶5

CRM-M-31224-2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026

¶6

NEERAJ YADAV AND OTHERS …PETITIONERS

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL

¶10

Present: Mr. Bhupinder Ghangas, Advo c ate for the petitioners.

¶11

Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Harya n a.

¶12

Mr. Jonti Phogat, Advocate for Mr. Anil Chahal, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5.

¶13

¶14

Shalini Singh Nagpal, J. (Oral)

¶15

Petitioners seek quashing of FI R No.58 dated 13.03.2026 unde r Sections 11 5 , 190, 191(2), 333 and 351( 2 ) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023, Polic e Station Civil Lines, Bhiw a ni, District Bhiwani, and al l consequenti a l proceedings arising therefro m , on the basis of compromis e dated 15.05. 2 026.

¶16

On 29.05.2026, this Court dire c ted the parties to appear befor e learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for re c ording of their statements wit h regard to co m promise dated 15.05.2026.

¶17

JYOTI 2026.09.10 19:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

¶19

CRM-M-31224-2026

¶20

In compliance of the aforesai d order, parties appeared befor e learned Ad d itional Chief Judicial Magis t rate, Bhiwani on 02.06.2026 . Statement o f Investigating Officer ASI R ajesh was also recorded o n 10.06.2026. Learned Additional Chief J udicial Magistrate, Bhiwani , Ludhiana has submitted his report recordin g satisfaction that all the partie s have entere d into a valid compromise wit h out any influence or coercion . Point-wise r e port as under has been submitted:

¶21

“1. That in the present FIR, six accused persons namely Neera j Yadav son of Manoj Kumar, M a ngopal @ Gopal son of Mano j Kumar (minor), Sudha wife of M ukesh, Sanjogta wife of Mano j Kumar, Mukesh son of Mahen d er Singh and Manoj Kumar so n of Mahender Singh (petitioners ) , all residents of House No. 66, Kripa Ram Ki Dhani Rohtak G a te, Bhiwani are arraigned, an d in the course of investigatio n , Sudha wife of Mukesh an d Sanjogta wife of Manoj found i n nocent and they are kept in th e column No. 12 of the challan, which is yet to be filec. All th e accused persons named above a ppeared before this Court an d made thei statement about compromise. No accused i s absconding/proclaimed person i n this case.

¶22

2. that in the present case, Ravinder son of Prem Parkash, resident of Kripa Ram Ki Dhan i , Rohtak Gate, Bhiwani (respo n lent No. 2) is complainant an d in the present FIR, total fou r p ersons namely Ravinder son of Prem Parkash (complainant), Prem Parkash son of Ram S aroop, Krishna wife of Pre m

¶23

JYOTI 2026.09.10 19:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

¶25

CRM-M-31224-2026

¶26

Parkash and Parmod son of P r em Parkash are injured and al l of them are aggrieved person s and all of them appeared fo r making statement about compr o mise.

¶27

(3) that the trial in this case ha s not been started as the challa n is yet to be filed.

¶28

(4) that the compromise b etween the petitioners an d respondent No. 2 to 5 (accused p ersons and complainant party ) is voluntarily, an without a n y fear, pressure and greed, misrepresentation, coercion a n undue influence etc. and i s result of free will of parties.

¶29

(5) that no any other crimin a l case is pending against th e accused persons.”

¶30

Learned State counsel has not r aised any dispute regarding th e factum of c ompromise. Since the matter has been amicably resolved , continuation of the criminal proceedings wo u ld be an exercise in futility.

¶31

Following principles of law l aid down by the Full Benc h 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 i n “Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others”(2012) 10 SCC 303, th e petition is al l owed.

¶32

FIR No.58 dated 13.03.2026 u n der Sections 115, 190, 191(2) , 333 and 35 1 (2) of Bharatiya Nyaya San h ita, 2023, Police Station Civi l Lines, Bhiw a ni, District Bhiwani, and all c o nsequential proceedings arisin g

¶33

JYOTI 2026.09.10 19:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶34

¶35

CRM-M-31224-2026

¶36

therefrom, a r e quashed qua the petitioners, o n the basis of compromise date d

¶37

15.05.2026.

¶38