IN THE 283 Harjeet Singh and State of Haryana CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. Mr. Ms. for **** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Prayer Nagarik Suraksha 01.04.2015 under Indian Penal Code Ambala along with conviction and order Judicial Magistrate therefrom based (Annexure P-4). 2. The Sukhwinder Singh Mahesh Nagar Police as under:- “…. the THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-65911 Date of decision: and others VERSUS Haryana and another HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD Mr. S.S. Jattan, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Armaan Dahiya, AAG, Haryana. Ms. Sundeep Kaur and Ms. Varsha respondent No.2. **** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) Prayer in the present petition under Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for quashing under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, Code, 1860 registered at Police Station with all subsequent proceedings order of sentence dated 09.03.2023/14.03.2023 Magistrate 1st Class, Ambala in case based on the compromise deed/affidavit ). The FIR in the present case was registered Singh son of Sewa Singh, resident Police Station, District Ambala, …. I am a resident of the above address military and on 29.03.2015 small PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 65911-2025 (O&M) decision: 11.02.2026 ...Petitioner(s) ...Respondent(s) VINOD S. BHARDWAJ petitioners. . Choudhary, Advocates Section 528 of the Bharatiya quashing of FIR No.99 dated 324, 325, 452 and 506 of the Station Mahesh Nagar, District proceedings, including the judgment of 09.03.2023/14.03.2023 passed by the No.CHI-1011-2015, arising deed/affidavit dated 10.11.2025 registered on the complaint of resident of M.No.25, Pooja Vihar relevant part of which reads address and am retired from small baby chickens were killed SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.23 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 283 CRM-M-65911-2025 (O&M) -2- by the dog of Harjeet Singh from my poultry farm, about which a panchayat was held in the police station and in the panchayat Harjeet Singh etc. had sweared on name-religion and our matter was settled. At night, I was present at my poultry farm at around 10.30 pm, at that time Randhir Singh son of Karnail Singh, Jasbir Singh son of Gurcharan came with guns in their hands and Harjeet Singh son of Dev Singh and Kala son of Karnail Singh came with swords in their hands and Kaptan, Jot sons of Jasvir Singh, Pala son of Pindra sons of Resham Singh came with sticks in their hands and hurling foul language and Jasvir Singh challenged me to kill him and while saying this Harjeet Singh hit me on the head with the axe he was holding in his hand and Kala attacked me with his sword which hit my arm and Kaptan, Jot, Pala and Pindra residents of Mahesh Nagar beat me badly with the sticks they were holding in their hands and meanwhile Jaswant Singh son of Gurdev Singh resident of Pilkhani and my son Manjeet Singh also came on the spot and while beating them they lost their lives. I have seen it with my own eyes and they have injured me a lot. They threatened to kill me andwent away from there abusing me with their two weapons. After that my son Manjeet Singh brought me for treatment and got me admitted in GH Ambala Cantt from where after treatment Dr. referred me to PGI Chandigarh, where now I am admitted in MH Ambala Cantt for treatment. The above mentioned Harjeet Singh and others came to my farm and beat me up and injured me illegally. Against whom Legal action should be taken. “ 3. Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.03.2023/14.03.2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ambala, the petitioners were convicted under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 452 and 506 of the IPC and sentenced as follows: SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.23 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 283 CRM-M-65911-2025 (O&M) -3- IPC Section Sentence 148 RI for a period of one year each 149 RI for a period of one year each 323 RI for a period of one year each 324 RI for a period of two years each 325 RI for a period of two years each along with a fine of ₹ 100/- each 452 RI for a period of three years each along with a fine of ₹ 100/- each 506 RI for a period of one year each Vide order dated 01.04.2023, the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala, suspended the sentence awarded to the petitioners till the disposal of the appeal. However, with the intervention of the respectables, the parties have decided to compromise the matter. Hence, the present petition. 4 The parties were thus directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate vide order dated 21.11.2025 of this Court, to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at between the parties and a report in this regard was called for. 5 Pursuant to the said order, a report has been received from the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala, vide Memo No.645 dated 24.12.2025. The relevant extract of the report is reproduced as under: - “The required report is submitted hereinbelow: 1) Eight persons namely Harjeet Sinigh son of Ajiab Singh, Jasbir Singh w/o Charan Singh, Amarjot @ Jot son of Jasbir Singh, Randhir Singh son of Karnail Singh, Ranbir Singh son of Karnal Singh, Kaptan Singh son of Jasbir Singh, Palla @ Pritpal Singh son of Resham Singh and Pindra @ Kulwinder Singh son of Resham Singh arrayed as accused in the present FIR and out of which charge sheet/report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed against five accused namely Harjeet Sinigh son of Ajiab Singh, Jasbir Singh w/o Charan Singh, Amarjot @ SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.23 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 283 CRM-M-65911-2025 (O&M) -4- Jot son of Jasbir Singh, Randhir Singh son of Karnail Singh, Ranbir Singh son of Karnal Singh. ii) There is one complainant/victim in the present case. iii) All the accused and complainant/victims are party to the compromise and have signed the same. iv) No affected person is left out. v) None of the accused is a proclaimed offender. vi) From the statements of complainant and accused recorded by this court, it appears that the compromise arrived between them is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence. vii) Charge sheet/report u/s 173 Cr.P.C. was not filed against accused Kaptan Singh son of Jasbir Singh, Palla @ Pritpal Singh son of Resham Singh and Pindra @ Kulwinder Singh son of Resham Singh their names were kept in Column No.2. It is pertinent to mention herein that the costs of Rs.10,000/-each has been deposited appellants-accused with DHFWS SKS USERFEES CS OFFICE, Panchkula and the receipts thereof are annexed herewith.” 6. Learned State counsel does not dispute the factum of the compromise amongst the parties and does not have any serious objection to the resolution of the dispute amongst the parties. 7. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 reiterates the settlement and their concurrence to the FIR and all the other consequential proceedings being quashed. 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of ‘Ramgopal and Another v. State of M.P.’, reported as (2022) 14 SCC 531, laid down the principles for cases in which an FIR could be quashed even after conviction. The relevant SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.23 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 283 CRM-M-65911-2025 (O&M) -5- paragraphs are extracted as under: ”19.We thus sum up and hold that as opposed to Section 320CrPC where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences “compoundable” within the statutory framework, the extraordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482CrPC or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320CrPC. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: 19.1. Nature and effect of the offence on the conscience of the society; 19.2. Seriousness of the injury, if any; 19.3 Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; and 19.4 Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations.” 9. The following relevant factors emerge from perusal of the case as well as the subsequent developments supplementing a case for invocation of the powers under Section 528 BNSS:- i. The dispute between the parties arose because of the petitioner No.1’s dog killing the baby chicks at the complainant’s poultry farm, and there was no previous enmity between the parties. ii. The parties have amicably resolved their dispute, and the compromise has been entered into voluntarily, without any coercion, pressure, or undue influence. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.23 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 283 CRM-M-65911-2025 (O&M) -6- iii. Petitioners are aged 41 years, 52 years, 55 years, 46 years and 32 years respectively. Sending them to the gallows for serving the remaining part of the sentence would serve no reformative or deterrent purpose. iv. The offence(s) alleged can neither be characterized as heinous or of such gravity as to shock the collective conscience of society, nor do they partake the nature of offences that would shock the conscience of the Court. 10. In view of the report of the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in “Ramgopal and Another v. State of M.P.” reported as (2022) 14 SCC 531, the instant petition is allowed. FIR No.99 dated 01.04.2015 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 452 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District Ambala along with all subsequent proceedings, including the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.03.2023/14.03.2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ambala in case No.CHI-1011-2015, arising therefrom, are hereby quashed in view of the compromise deed/affidavit dated 10.11.2025 (Annexure P-4). 11. Petition is allowed in above terms. 11.02.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.23 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document