VIJAY KUMAR vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — CRM-M/5843/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 24-Mar-2026

CNR: PHHC010168082026

Filing Number

CRM-M/5036/2026

Filing Date

30-Jan-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/5843/2026

Registration Date

30-Jan-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel

Coram

Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

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

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 11-Apr-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VIJAY KUMAR

    Adv. SUKESH KUMAR JINDAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    Mr. Justice Sumeet GoelView PDF

    Summary of CRM-M/5843/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana quashed FIR No.485 (registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of BNS and Section 24 of Emigration Act) against Vijay Kumar based on a voluntary compromise dated 29.01.2026 between the petitioner and complainants Rajni and Rinku. The court found the offences were primarily private in nature, the compromise was genuinely voluntary without coercion, and quashing would serve substantial justice. The petitioner was ordered to deposit Rs.20,000 as costs to the Police Welfare Fund. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/5843/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CRM-M/5843/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana quashed FIR No.485 (registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of BNS and Section 24 of Emigration Act) against Vijay Kumar based on a voluntary compromise dated 29.01.2026 between the petitioner and complainants Rajni and Rinku. The court found the offences were primarily private in nature, the compromise was genuinely voluntary without coercion, and quashing would serve substantial justice. The petitioner was ordered to deposit Rs.20,000 as costs to the Police Welfare Fund. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case