The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of the guidelines for quashing criminal proceedings, emphasizing the nature and gravity of the crime and the impact on public peace and tranquility.

MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J.

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.0164 dated 05.03.2021 (P-1), under Sections 323, 34, 365, 506 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (Sections 365 and 511 IPC were deleted later on), registered at Police Station, Karnal Sadar, District Karnal, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 02.06.2023 (P-2), entered into between the parties i.e. petitioners as well as respondent No.2.

2. Allegations are that the petitioners inflicted injuries upon complainant and his wife. They also tried to kidnap complainant but on making hue & cry, the petitioners ran away.

3. This Court, while issuing notice of motion on the previous date of hearing i.e. 03.07.2023, passed the following order:-

“Contends, inter alia, that matter has been compromised between the parties.

(2) Notice of motion.

(3) On asking of the Court, Mr. Bhupender Singh, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1/State.

(4) Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Advocate, who is present in the Court, has filed power of attorney on behalf of respondent No.2. The same is taken on record. She acknowledged the factum of compromise dated 02.06.2023 (P-2) arrived at between the parties at their own level.

(5) Requisite number of copies of the petition be supplied to learned Counsel for the respondents during the course of day.

(6) Petitioners shall file their respective affidavits that there is no other criminal case(s) pending against them and also give the details of any other FIR(s), already quashed on the basis of compromise.

(7) In view of the above, let parties appear before the Court of learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court on 25.07.2023 for recording their statement(s) with reference to the compromise, if any, entered into between them.

(8) Learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court shall record the statement(s) of all accused, complainant/injured and victim, if any, and submit a report to this Court before the next date of hearing containing the following information:-

(i). Whether the statements of the parties are bona fide and not result of any pressure or coercion etc. in any manner?

(ii). Whether the compromise effected between the parties is genuine and valid?

(iii). Whether all the accused, complainant and injured are party to the compromise and if not, the details/particulars of such person(s)?

(iv). Whether any other case is pending against either of the parties or not, if yes, the details thereof?

(v). Whether any of the persons involved in this case/dispute has been declared a proclaimed offender?

(vi). Whether any of the petitioner(s) is/are previous convict or not?

(9) List before this Court on 17.08.2023 for further consideration.

(10) Meanwhile, learned State Counsel shall also get the instructions in the matter as to whether the State has any objection?

(11) Copy of this order be sent to learned Judicial Officer concerned forthwith for information and strict compliance.”

4. In terms of aforesaid order, statements of both the parties were recorded and a report dated 04.08.2023 has been submitted in this regard by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. The operative part of the same reads as under:-

“Parties have submitted that without any pressure and coercion, a compromise has been effected between complainant and accused persons. This has been done to finish the litigation and to have peaceful and harmonious relations. Now the complainant does not want any action against accused persons and requested to quash the FIR in question. Statement of Investigating Officer has also been recorded, as mentioned above.”

5. A perusal of the aforesaid report clearly reveals that the matter has been compromised by both the parties with their free consent, voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. Even before this Court also, there is no objection by either of the parties against the compromise.

6. Learned State Counsel, on instructions from the police officer presen