Jitender Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Others

This petition has been filed u n der Section 528 of BNSS for quashing o f FIR No.129, dated 12.08.202 5 , registered under Section 106 BNS, at P o lice Station Sadar Jagadhri, D istrict Yamuna Nagar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise. 2. Learned counsel for the petiti o ner submits that the deceased, Vikas alias Ravi, unfortunately lost his life due to an electric shock and as such, incid e nt was purely accidental in na t ure and no fault or negligence can be attri b uted to any person. In this rega r d, he relies on the judgment of this Court in the case of Sikander Yadav and another vs. State of Haryana and others , CRM-M-55259-2019 dated 24.02.2023 wherein also, death h ad occurred due to electric shock and FIR was quashed based on compro m ise.

This Court while issuing notic e of motion vide order dated

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.20 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

28.01.2026, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the compromise. 4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 20.02.2026 has been received from learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jagadhri. A perusal of the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled between them and they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. The compromise effected between them is genuine, without any undue influence and coercion. It is stated in the report that there is only one accused, who has not been declared as proclaimed offender and is not involved in any other case.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the case file.

¶6

The Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, held that High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court is of the view that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.

¶7

Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to

¶8

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.20 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶9

quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected.

¶10

The relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment reads thus:-

¶11

“57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code.

¶12

Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. XXX---XXX ”

¶13

8. This Court in the case of Sikander Yadav (supra), wherein

¶14

also the death had occurred on account of electric shock, while emphasizing the purpose of criminal jurisprudence to be reformatory in nature and bring peace to the family, community and society, thereby, quashed the FIR registered under Section 304-A IPC. The important aspects observed were that the compromise had taken place without any coercion or dubious means and the accused was not an incorrigible or a professional offender.

¶15

9. In view of the afore-referred judgments, perusing the report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner and the complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a quietus to all disputes between the parties and it is in the interest of both sides to bury the hatchet and lead a peaceful life. Thus, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings and in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings in the present case deserve to be quashed.

¶16

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.20 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶17

10. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.129,

¶18

dated 12.08.2025, registered under Section 106 BNS, at Police Station Sadar Jagadhri, District Yamuna Naga r, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of the compromise.

¶19

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.20 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Jitender Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitender Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others

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

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rita Vs State of Punjab and Others

Amit Alias Amit Kumar and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sandeep Vs State of Haryana and Another

Veenus William Vs State of Punjab and Others

Amrik Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Himanshu and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others