MANOJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ***

(2.) The gist of the allegations against the petitioner(s) is that the complainant (respondent No.2) made a statement before the police and based on that statement, the police registered the FIR captioned above. Needless to mention all the details and it is sufficient to say that the parties have entered into a compromise.

(3.) During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the injured have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition. After that, the petitioner(s) came up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, the injured/complainant have been impleaded as respondent(s).