IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

279 Date of decision: 12.01.2026 Sudhir Tripathi ...Petitioner(s)

VERSUS State of Haryana and another ...Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Sanjeev Majra, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Onkar Singh Wahla, Sr. DAG Haryana.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in the present petition is for seeking quashing of FIR No.06 dated 09.01.2025 registered under Section(s) 318(4), 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 registered at Police Station Cyber Crime Karnal, District Karnal alongwith all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 19.08.2025 (Annexure P-2).

2. Briefly summarized, the facts of the present case are that the respondent-complainant Praveen Kumar Johar works in Manipal Saugna and also trades in the stock market. One day, he received a call from the petitioner, who exhorted the former to watch and follow his videos daily. Thereafter, the petitioner offered to teach online trading to the complainant for a fee of Rs.25,000/- per month. The petitioner then gave his account number and the complainant deposited the fees in the said account.

However, the complainant did not receive any link and on the pretext of fixing the technical issue, the petitioner asked the username and password of his trading account on Dhan Trading App. The complainant gave the required details to the petitioner; however, the latter took advantage of the same and invested Rs. 2,00,000/- from his trading account in option trading, thereby causing a loss of Rs.1,20,000/- to the complainant. The complainant asked the petitioner to return his money along with interest but the petitioner did not comply and went on to block the complainant’s number. Thus, the present FIR came to be registered against the petitioner.

3. However, with the intervention of the respectables, the parties have decided to compromise the matter. Hence, the present petition. The parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate vide order dated 02.09.2025 of this Court, to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at between the parties and a report in this regard was called for.

4. Pursuant to the said order, report has been received from the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Karnal vide Memo No. 162 dated 12.11.2025.

The relevant extract of the report is reproduced as under:-

“(i) Total number of persons found involved as accused in the dispute/ FIR?

Ans. As per the statement of ASI Devender 1798, P.S. Cyber Crime, Karnal, there was only one accused namely-

Sudhir Tripathi.

(ii) Number of complainant/victim(s)?

Ans. As per the statement of ASI Devender 1798, P.S. Cyber Crime, Karnal, there was only one complainant namely-

Parveen Kumar Johar.

(iii) Whether all the accused and complainant/victims are party to compromise and signed the same?

Ans. As per the statement of IO accused and complainant/victims are party to the compromise and have signed the same (iv) In case, any affected person (accused or complainant) is left out or not arrayed as party in the quashing petition before High Court, detail whereof, Ans. No other person is left out.

OR His/her statement is still to be recorded, in compliance to the direction of this Court, details of such person;

Ans. No statement of any other person is left to be recorded.

(v) Whether any accused has been declared as a proclaimed offender/person or any such proceedings against him/her have been initiated or pending adjudication;

Ans. No, as per the statement of IO, the accused has never been declared as proclaimed offender in any case.

(vi) Report of the Court whether compromise is genuine, voluntary, and without any coercion or undue influence;

Ans. Yes, the compromise between the parties is valid and genuine and has been effected voluntarily without any coercion or undue influence.

(vii) Any other aspect relevant to the present case.

Ans. No.”

5. Learned State counsel do