SAJID ALIAS SEHJAD AND OTHERS vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS Advocate - A.G. HARYANA — CRM-M/3198/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 323,324,506,34 IPC. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 14th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010079832024

Filing Number

CRM-M/4883/2024

Filing Date

18-Jan-2024

Registration No

CRM-M/3198/2024

Registration Date

19-Jan-2024

Judge

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Coram

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Bench Type

Single

Category

38.21 - QUASHING PETITION COMPROMISE U/S 482 CRPC GEN ( 641 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

14-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 323,324,506,34 IPC

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAJID ALIAS SEHJAD AND OTHERS

    Adv. NAFEESH AHMED

  2. 2.FASIN

  3. 3.NADIM

  4. 4.AUSAMA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS Advocate - A.G. HARYANA

  2. 2.SHOKIN

  3. 3.SHAHRUKH KHAN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Sanjay VashisthView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed a petition filed by four accused persons seeking quashing of FIR No.79 (2021) under IPC Sections 323, 324, 506, and 34 based on a compromise agreement. The court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution after it remained pending since January 2024, noting that petitioners failed to appear despite multiple directions and that two juvenile petitioners had already been acquitted by the Juvenile Justice Board. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Jan-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/3198/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed a petition filed by four accused persons seeking quashing of FIR No.79 (2021) under IPC Sections 323, 324, 506, and 34 based on a compromise agreement. The court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution after it remained pending since January 2024, noting that petitioners failed to appear despite multiple directions and that two juvenile petitioners had already been acquitted by the Juvenile Justice Board. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case