IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

266 CRM-M-69163-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision:27.01.2026 Mandeep Singh …Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Kapil Khanna, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Akash Yadav, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2.

****

Shalini Singh Nagpal, J. (Oral)

1. Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.174 dated 19.10.2022 under Sections 509, 354-A, 354-C IPC, Sections 66-D and 67-A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Police Station Adampur, District Jalandhar, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 01.12.2025. Section 66-C was added in the FIR during investigation.

2. On 09.12.2025, this Court directed the parties to appear before learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements with regard to compromise dated 01.12.2025.

3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, parties appeared before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar on 15.12.2025. Statement of Investigating Officer Inspector Hardeep Singh, No.634/GRP, SHO Satnampura, Phagwara, Kapurthala, was recorded on 08.01.2026. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, has submitted his report recording satisfaction that all the parties have entered into a valid compromise without any influence or coercion. The relevant part of the report as under has been submitted:

“1. As per the statement of Investigating Officer, there is only person namely Mandeep Singh son of Balvir Singh, resident of Village Rarha, P.O Salempur, P.S. Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, Jalandhar, who is arrayed as accused in the present FIR.

2. As per the statement of Investigating Officer, there is only accused Mandeep Singh, who has appeared before this Court and made his statement.

3. As per the statement of Investigating Officer, during investigation, no additional accused was added.

4. As per the statement of Investigating Officer, accused Mandeep Singh is on bail in the present case and he is not absconder/proclaimed person.

5. As per the statement of Investigating Officer, after registration of FIR, offence under Section 506 of IPC was added, during the Investigation. It is further submitted that as per the statement of Investigating Officer, the present FIR has also been registered under Section 66-C of Information Technology Act, 2000.

6. As per the statement of Investigating Officer, the investigation in the present case is completed and none of the accused has been declared innocent.

7. As per the statement of Investigating Officer, the name of the complainant is Hina D/o Sh. Manmohan Lal, resident of Village Kooper, P.O Adda Kathar, Koopur, Jalandhar and she is the only aggrieved person.

8. Complainant/aggrieved person namely Hina has appeared before this court and got recorded her statement.

9. The present case is at the stage of prosecution evidence.

10. As per the statement of the parties, the compromise so arrived at between the parties, seems to be genuine, voluntary and out of free will of the parties.

11. As per the statement of Investigating Officer, no other criminal case or proceeding is pending against the accused.”

4. Learned State counsel has not raised any dispute regarding the factum of compromise. Since the matter has been amicably resolved, continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility. The dispute which has its genesis in a matrimonial discord, warrants exercise of powers under Section 528 BNSS.

5. Following principles of law laid down by the Full Bench Judgment of this Court in “Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another” 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others” (2012) 10 SCC 303, the petition is allowed.

6. Consequently, FIR No.174 dated 19.10.2022 under Sections 509, 354-A, 354-C IPC, Sections 66-D and 67-A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Police Station Adampur