SHAMSHER vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER — CRM-M/3166/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 13-May-2026

CNR: PHHC010090272026

Filing Number

CRM-M/1197/2026

Filing Date

19-Jan-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/3166/2026

Registration Date

19-Jan-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj

Coram

Mr. Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj

Bench Type

Single

Category

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

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHAMSHER

    Adv. KUSHAGRA MAHAJAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Vinod S. BhardwajView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/3166/2026 Decision: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 493 (registered December 15, 2025) against Shamsher for negligent discharge of a pistol causing serious injury to complainant Satpal, based on a voluntary compromise dated January 12, 2026. Key Reasoning: Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj found the settlement genuine and voluntary, the offense non-heinous (involving negligent rather than intentional conduct), the case still in early investigative stages, and continuation futile since the complainant would not support prosecution. The court applied Supreme Court precedent requiring quashing when parties settle cases with predominantly civil character and conviction chances are remote. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/3166/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/3166/2026 Decision: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 493 (registered December 15, 2025) against Shamsher for negligent discharge of a pistol causing serious injury to complainant Satpal, based on a voluntary compromise dated January 12, 2026. Key Reasoning: Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj found the settlement genuine and voluntary, the offense non-heinous (involving negligent rather than intentional conduct), the case still in early investigative stages, and continuation futile since the complainant would not support prosecution. The court applied Supreme Court precedent requiring quashing when parties settle cases with predominantly civil character and conviction chances are remote. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case