IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Anmol ....Petitioner V/s State of Haryana and others ....Respondents Reserved on: 09.12.2025 Date of decision: 11.12.2025 Date of Uploading: 11.12.2025 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Sahil Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Hemant Hans, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J.

1. The present petition has been preferred by the accused under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing of the FIR No.187 dated 04.09.2025 registered under Sections 281, 125(a), 106 of BNS, 2023 at Police StationJathlana, District Yamuna Nagar; as also the proceedings subsequent thereto, on the basis of compromise deed dated 14.11.2025 (copy whereof is appended as Annexure P-2 with the present petition).

2. The gravamen of the impugned FIR is that complainant namely Mumrez Khan (respondent No.2 herein) stated that he and Rasid (since deceased) lived together and worked as labourers. On 03.09.2025 at about 04:30 PM, the said Rasid alongwith Asad (nephew of Munrez Khan – complainant) were riding a motorcycle bearing No.HR92B8752 accompanied by the complainant and his acquaintance Ehsan on another motorbike. When they reached near the godown of Bharat Gas Agency, a Hero Super Splendor bearing No.HR02H8438, driven negligently by an unknown person hit the motorcycle of deceased Rasid. On account of the impact, Rasid son of Kuma, resident of village Gumthala, District Yamuna Nagar and Asad son of Salim resident of village Mohdi, fell unconscious due to the injuries sustained. They were immediately taken to the Civil Hospital, Yamuna Nagar for treatment but Rasid succumbed to his injuries en route. Based on these set of allegations, the impugned FIR was registered.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the impugned FIR. Learned counsel has further submitted that a compromise has been entered into between the petitioner and the FIR-complainant on 14.11.2025, relevant whereof reads as under:

“1. That as per the compromise, the first parties do not want to initiate any legal action against the second party in the above-mentioned case no. 187/2025 and it has also been decided in the compromise that the first parties will be bound and responsible to get the above-mentioned case cancelled by appearing in the Hon'ble Court and giving statement etc. in favour of the second party.

2. That in the spirit of this compromise, the first parties will be bound to get the above mentioned case No. 187. dated 04-09-2025 under sections 281, 125 (A), 106 BNS quashed at Police Station Jathlana, District Yamuna Nagar and if for getting the said case quashed, if there is a need to file statement etc. before the Honorable High Court or any competent authority, then the first parties will be bound or responsible to get the said case dismissed/quashed by giving their statement etc. under the legal process, and thereafter the first parties will not be entitled to take any further legal action against the second party in the above mentioned case.

3. That as per the compromise, the first parties have no objection to the said case being questioned.

4. That as per the agreement, the second party will not take any legal action against the first parties nor will they hold any grudge in future.

5. That the parties will not hold any grudge against each other in future nor will they file any litigation against each other and the parties will live in peace in future.

6. That the parties and their heirs are and will remain bound by this compromise. Whoever violates it will be liable and responsible for the expenses of the other party. Therefore, the parties have heard and understood this compromise in person, have accepted it as correct and have got it written down, please be aware. Dated 12-11-2025.”

Learned counsel has, thus, iterated that the impugned FIR which was registered b