SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J.

CRM-28177-2026

This is an application, seeking for permission to place certain documents on record. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is hereby allowed and the documents annexed with the application are taken on record.

CRM-M-30752-2026

2. The present petition, which is second petition, has been filed under Section 528 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’, for quashing of FIR No.510 dated 19.11.2019, Police Station Pundri, District Kaithal, for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 170, 201, 120-B of Indian Penal Code and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act, along with all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom. The quashing of FIR has been sought on the ground of compromise.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The case file has also been perused carefully.

4. This Court vide order dated 27.05.2026 had directed the parties to appear before the learned Jurisdiction Magistrate, for the recording of their statements. The learned Jurisdiction Magistrate, too, was directed to submit a report.

5. Pursuant to aforesaid order, a report from the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Kaithal, dated 15.06.2026 has been received. A perusal of abovesaid report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded, who have stated that the matter has been amicably settled between them, and that they have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. As per report, the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, without any undue influence and coercion.

6. As far as the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner(s) is concerned, a perusal of the record shows that the offence punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 170, 201, 120-B of IPC and Section 66-D of IT Act, for which the petitioners have been prosecuted, is non-compoundable with the permission of Court. If the facts and circumstances pertaining to present case are analyzed in the backdrop of relevant legal principles, it transpires:-

i) that the occurrence involved in the present case is purely personal and private in nature;

ii) that there is no criminal history of the petitioner(s);

iii) that it does not involve heinous and serious offence of mental depravity;

iv) that the action of petitioner(s) does not have a serious impact on the society; and

v) that the cause of administration of criminal justice system would remain unaffected on acceptance of the amicable settlement between the parties.

vi) that the accused and the private respondent(s) have amicably settled the matter between them in terms of the compromise deed and the statements recorded before the concerned Court;

vii) that a perusal of the documents reveal that the settlement has not been secured through coercion, threats, social boycotts, bribes, or other dubious means,

viii) that the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings;

ix) that there is no objection from the private respondents in case present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed;

x) that in the given facts, the occurrence does not affect public peace or tranquility, moral turpitude or harm the social and moral fabric of the society or involve matters concerning public policy;

xi) that the rejection of compromise may lead to ill will and the pendency of trial affects career and happiness;

xii) that there is nothing on the record to prima facie consider the accused as an unscrupulous, incorrigible, and professional offender;

xiii) that the exercise of the inheren