Nayan Navin Raheja @ Nayan Raheja and Another Vs State of Haryana and Another (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
Summary: The Punjab and Haryana High Court, in Nayan Navin Raheja @ Nayan Raheja and Another Vs State of Haryana and Another, allowed a petition seeking quashing of an FIR and consequential criminal proceedings following a compromise between the parties. The petition was filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), challenging FIR No. 145 dated 09.06.2023, registered at Police Station DLF PH-3rd, Gurugram. The FIR invoked Sections 120-B, 34, 406, 409, 420, 467, 471 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, along with their corresponding provisions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioners sought quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings on the basis of compromises dated 11.10.2023 and 06.06.2026.
During the proceedings, the High Court passed an order dated 07.07.2026 directing the parties to appear before the jurisdictional Magistrate or trial Magistrate for recording their statements concerning the compromise. In compliance with that direction, the parties appeared before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram, and their statements were recorded. The Magistrate subsequently submitted a report dated 06.08.2026 confirming satisfaction regarding the genuineness and voluntariness of the compromise. Importantly, the report recorded that the settlement had been reached without coercion or undue influence. The High Court considered this judicial verification significant in determining whether the criminal proceedings should continue.
After hearing the parties and examining the case record, Justice N.S. Shekhawat considered the nature of the offences and the verified settlement. The Court observed that the offences for which the accused had been charged were not of a serious nature in the circumstances of the case. It further recognised that the compromise would assist in resolving the differences between the parties and contribute to the betterment of their future lives. In reaching its conclusion, the High Court relied upon the principles laid down in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, and Kulwinder Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052. These precedents were expressly cited in support of the decision to quash the criminal proceedings on the basis of the compromise.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 145 dated 09.06.2023, registered under the specified IPC provisions and corresponding BNS provisions at Police Station DLF PH-3rd, Gurugram, together with all consequential proceedings arising from it, qua the petitioners. The relief was expressly confined to the petitioners before the Court. The decision demonstrates the application of the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS where a genuine and voluntary settlement has been judicially verified and the Court considers quashing appropriate in view of the nature of the offences and the circumstances of the dispute.
Cases Discussed
1. Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another (Supreme Court); 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543. Relied upon by the High Court while allowing quashing of the FIR on the basis of a genuine and voluntary compromise. The decision concerns the exercise of the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction in criminal proceedings following settlement between the parties.
2. Kulwinder Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab (Punjab and Haryana High Court); 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052. Relied upon concerning the exercise of inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings in appropriate cases following a compromise between the parties.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
1. This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S for quashing of FIR No. 145, dated 09.06.2023, registered under Sections 120-B, 34, 406, 409, 420, 467, 471 and 506 of IPC {corresponding Sections 61(2), 3(5), 316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 338, 340(2), and 351(2) of B.N.S.}, Police Station DLF PH-3rd, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 11.10.2023 and 06.06.2026.
2. Vide order dated 07.07.2026 while issuing notice of motion, this Court had directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Magistrate for getting their statements recorded with respect to the aforesaid compromise.
3. Pursuant to aforesaid order, the parties have appeared before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram and got their statements recorded. Report dated 06.08.2026 has been received whereby after recording the statements of the parties, the Court below has shown its satisfaction that the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.
4. I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the case file.
5. In the light of the satisfaction shown by the Court below and considering the offence for which the accused have been charged are not of serious nature, together with the fact that compromise will go a long way in ironing out the differences for betterment of future life of the parties and also in view of the law laid down in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the present petition for quashing the FIR is allowed qua the petitioners.
7. Resultantly, the FIR No. 145, dated 09.06.2023, registered under Sections 120-B, 34, 406, 409, 420, 467, 471 and 506 of IPC {corresponding Sections 61(2), 3(5), 316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 338, 340(2), and 351(2) of B.N.S.}, Police Station DLF PH-3rd, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.
