Dinesh v. State of Haryana and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Jul 2026CRM-M/4366/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRM-M-4366-2026, Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, decided 13.07.2026 by Jasjit Singh Bedi, J.: quashing of FIR No.0166 dated 10.08.2026 under Section 304 BNS, 2023 (PS Ismailabad, District Kurukshetra) qua petitioner Dinesh on basis of compromise dated 12.12.2025 with respondent No.2; genuineness verified by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pehowa (report dated 22.05.2026); exercise of Section 482 Cr.PC powers; reliance on Kulwinder Singh (2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052) and Gian Singh (2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543); petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No.0166 dated 10.08.2026 registered under Section 304 of the BNS, 2023 at Police Station Ismailabad, District Kurukshetra, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioner. ¶¶25

Dinesh Vs State of Haryana and Another — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No.0166 dated 10.08.2026 (Annexure P-1) registered under Section 304 of the BNS, 2023 at Police Station Ismailabad, District Kurukshetra, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is liable to be quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of the compromise dated 12.12.2025 arrived at between the petitioner and respondent No.2.

¶¶16

Court's answer

On the report of the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pehowa dated 22.05.2026, the parties were found to have effected a genuine compromise without any pressure, coercion or undue influence, with only a remote possibility of the complaint coming forward to support the prosecution case.

¶¶23

Ratio / Principle

The powers under Section 482 Cr.PC can be exercised in such a situation to prevent unnecessary vagaries of criminal trial being faced by the parties, where on account of the genuine compromise there are remote chances of conviction of the accused.

¶¶23

Key takeaways

The compromise in question was found to be fully in consonance with the directions issued in Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543.ratio¶¶23
In view of the report of the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pehowa accompanied by statements of both parties, FIR No.0166 dated 10.08.2026 registered under Section 304 of the BNS, 2023 at Police Station Ismailabad, District Kurukshetra, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, stands quashed qua the petitioner.ratio¶¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise — FIR No.0166 dated 10.08.2026 registered under Section 304 of the BNS, 2023 at Police Station Ismailabad, District Kurukshetra quashed qua the petitioner (Dinesh) on the basis of compromise dated 12.12.2025 with respondent No.2 — pursuant to order dated 28.01.2026 parties appeared before Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pehowa whose report dated 22.05.2026 confirmed a genuine compromise without pressure, coercion or undue influence, with remote possibility of the complaint supporting prosecution and remote chances of conviction — inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.PC exercised, compromise found fully in consonance with Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543 — petition disposed of (Jasjit Singh Bedi, J., oral, 13.07.2026).

¶1

CRM-M-4366-2026

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

304

¶5

CRM-M-4366-2026

¶6

Date of decision: 13.07.2026

¶7

DINESH

¶8

.... PETITIONER(S)

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

¶11

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶12

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

¶13

Present: Mr. Tarun Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Diya Sodhi, Senior DAG, Haryana. Mr. Manvender Chauhan, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶14

¶15

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral)

¶16

The prayer in this petition is for quashing of an FIR No.0166 dated 10.08.2026 (Annexure P-1) registered under Section 304 of the BNS, 2023 at Police Station Ismailabad, District Kurukshetra along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the petitioner and respondent No.2.

¶17

Vide order dated 28.01.2026, this Court had directed the parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded with regard to the compromise dated 12.12.2025 (Annexure P-2).

¶18

The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was to submit a report in this regard giving certain details as enumerated in the said order. 4. Pursuant to the order dated 28.01.2026 passed by this Court, the parties have appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pehowa and as per the report dated 22.05.2026 submitted to this Court, both

¶19

KUSUM 2026.07.14 11:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh

¶20

¶21

CRM-M-4366-2026

¶22

the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court.

¶23

A perusal of the aforesaid report would show that the parties have effected a genuine compromise without there being any pressure, coercion or undue influence. In view of the compromise there is a remote possibility of the complaint coming forward to support the prosecution case. The powers under Section 482 Cr.PC can be exercised in such like situation in order to prevent unnecessary vagaries of criminal trial to be faced by the parties, when there are remote chances of conviction of the accused. The compromise in question is found to be fully in consonance with the direction issued by the Court in “Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543”.

¶24

In view of the aforesaid report of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pehowa accompanied by statements of both the parties, the FIR No.0166 dated 10.08.2026 (Annexure P-1) registered under Section 304 of the BNS, 2023 at Police Station Ismailabad, District Kurukshetra along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.

¶25

Petition stands disposed of.

¶26

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE

¶27

13.07.2026

¶28

Kusum

¶29

Whether speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶30

KUSUM 2026.07.14 11:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh

Dinesh v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rashid Vs State of Haryana

Ajaydev Singh Vs Union of India through Junior Intelligence Officer

Aman Shangari Vs State of Punjab and Others

Sheejal Alias Seejal Alias Nagma Vs State of Haryana

Neeraj Vs State of Haryana

Gaurav Dhiman & Another Vs State of Punjab and Anr.