Vinod Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Another

¶1

1. The present petition has be e n filed for quashing of F IR No.0807, dated 25.12.2025, under Section s 115, 126, 3(5) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station S hahbad, District Kurukshetra, with all s u bsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromis e dated 30.01.2026.

¶2

2. This Court while issuing noti c e of motion vide order dated 05.02.2026 , directed the parties to appea r before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate f or recording their statements w i th regard to the compromise. 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid ord e r, report dated 23.03.2026 has been recei v ed from the Sub Divisional Ju d icial Magistrate, Shahabad. A perusal of t h e said report reveals that state m ents of the concerned persons have been r ecorded in the present case, w ho have stated that the matter has been se t tled between them and they ha v e no objection in case the FIR

¶3

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.13 12:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶4

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 FIR.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the case file. 5. 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.

¶6

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 quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected.

¶7

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

¶8

“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.

¶9

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 ”

¶10

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.13 12:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶11

7. 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.

¶12

8. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.0807, dated 25.12.2025, under Sections 115, 126, 3(5) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Shahbad, District Kurukshetra, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of the compromise.

¶13

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.13 12:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Vinod Kumar v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar 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

Case details

Similar cases

Sudhir @ Sudhir Yadav Vs Rohtash and Another

Santokh Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another

Har Chandi and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Mohammad Sabar Vs State of Punjab and Another

Rxxx and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Raghu Partap Dhawan Vs CBI and Another