MANDEEP SINGH ALIAS DEEPA v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
Court: High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Bench: MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Punjab and Haryana judgment dated 2025-08-18. MANDEEP SINGH ALIAS DEEPA v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 271 CRM-M-59299-2024 Date of decision : 18. 08. 2025 Mandeep Singh @ Deepa ...... Petitioner V/S State of Punjab and Anr. ..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr. I. S. Kooner, Advocate for petitioner. Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG, Punjab. Ms. Shruti Sharma, Advocate for Mr. M. P. S. Chahal, Advocate for respondent No. 2. **** AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner – Mandeep Singh @ Deepa has filed this petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of FIR No. 0112 dated 28. 09. 2023, registered under Section 354-C of IPC 1860 and Section 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 66-E of Information Technology Act, 2000 was added later on), at Police Station Hariana, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioner, in light of the compromise effected between the parties dated 22. 11.
2024 (Annexure P-2). 2. As per facts of the case, complainant/respondent No. 2 ‘MK’ gave her statement that she was working in the office of Jagtar Singh i. e. Finance and Journalism near Badwal Petrol Pump G. T. , Road Navi Basi Police Station Hariana. She was doing typing work for the last about 03 years. There was no washroom in their office, therefore, she used to use the washroom at Badwal Petrol Pump. Mandeep Singh @ Deepa was working as salesman at the said petrol pump and he was responsible for opening and closing the washroom and the keys of washroom used to be in his possession. On 28. 09. 2023 at about 3:30/3:35 PM, she went to the petrol pump to use the washroom. Mandeep Singh @ Deepa came out of the said washroom and locked it before handing over the keys to her. Before her entry, he told her that the lock was damaged from inside, therefore, she should take care. After using the washroom, she noticed that Apple iPhone covered with a cloth was lying in the ventilator.
She picked up the phone and saw that camera of the said phone was on. She took the said phone and went to her office and narrated the entire incident to Jagtar Singh. The accused kept the mobile phone on to prepare a video while she used the said washroom. With these allegations, present FIR was registered. 3. Petitioner filed this petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR on the basis of compromise. Vide order dated 24. 03. 2025, petitioner and respondent No. 2 were directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements on the basis of compromise. Detailed report regarding compromise has been received from the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hoshiarpur, dated 08. 04. 2025. Statement of respondent No. 2 has been recorded where she confirmed the compromise with petitioner. She confirmed that this compromise has been effected voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence and she has no objection regarding quashing of FIR. 4.
Petitioner-Mandeep Singh @ Deepa also confirmed this fact in his statement. Statement of DSP Jaskaran Kaur is also recorded who confirmed that petitioner is not involved or declared as proclaimed offender in any other criminal case. 5. Therefore, from the report of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hoshiarpur it is clear that the compromise has been effected between the parties without any pressure, coercion or undue influence, which is acceptable to both the parties. Workplace of both the parties is in the same locality. They have mutually settled their dispute. It will end the litigation started between them. 6. Gainful reference can be made to the judgment of Larger Bench of Five Judges of this High Court cited in 2007(3) R. C. R. (Criminal) 1052 titled as “Kulwinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Anr. ”, where it was explained that ‘there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the court to exercise its power under Section 482 of Cr. P. C.
The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the section itself i. e. to prevent abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. ’ 7. Therefore, by relying upon the ratio of the aforesaid judgment, no purpose would be served with the continuation of criminal proceedings. Considering these facts, the petition filed by the petitioner is accepted and FIR No. 0112 dated 28. 09. 2023, registered under Section 354-C of IPC 1860 and Section 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 66-E of Information Technology Act, 2000 was added later on), at Police Station Hariana, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arisen therefrom are quashed qua petitioner. (AMARJOT BHATTI ) JUDGE 18. 08. 2025. Sunil Devi Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No
Source: High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.