CRM-M-28598- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (330 ) KULWINDER KUMAR AND ORS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. J.S. Johal, Advocate for the petitioners Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab Mr. Nitin Sachdeva, Advocate for respondent No.2 MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short “BNSS”) for quashing of FIR No.83 dated 02.07.2015 registered under Sections 323, 325, 34 of IPC at Police Station Chabbewal, District Hoshiarpur alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence both dated 09.08.2019, on the basis of compromise dated 14.03.2026 (Annexure P-4) arrived at betw 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the parties by making amicable settlement have resolved their inter se dispute and, therefore, it is submitted by them that the quashing of the aforementioned complaint and the the continuation of thereof would be a futile exercise. -2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH KULWINDER KUMAR AND ORS Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. J.S. Johal, Advocate for the petitioners Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab Mr. Nitin Sachdeva, Advocate for respondent No.2 **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short “BNSS”) for quashing of FIR No.83 dated 02.07.2015 registered under Sections 323, 325, 34 of IPC at Police Station Chabbewal, District Hoshiarpur alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence both dated 09.08.2019, on the basis of compromise dated 14.03.2026 4) arrived at between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the parties by making amicable settlement have resolved their inter se dispute and, therefore, it is submitted by them that the quashing of the aforementioned complaint and the proceedings emanating therefrom, deserve to be allowed as the continuation of thereof would be a futile exercise. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-28598-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 16.07.2026 ... Petitioners ...Respondents HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. J.S. Johal, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Nitin Sachdeva, Advocate for respondent No.2 The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short “BNSS”) for quashing of FIR No.83 dated 02.07.2015 registered under Sections 323, 325, 34 of IPC at Police Station Chabbewal, District Hoshiarpur alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence both dated 09.08.2019, on the basis of compromise dated 14.03.2026 Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the parties by making amicable settlement have resolved their inter se dispute and, therefore, it is submitted by them that the quashing of the aforementioned proceedings emanating therefrom, deserve to be allowed as the continuation of thereof would be a futile exercise. Date of decision : 16.07.2026 The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short “BNSS”) for quashing of FIR No.83 dated 02.07.2015 registered under Sections 323, 325, 34 of IPC at Police Station Chabbewal, District Hoshiarpur alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence both dated 09.08.2019, on the basis of compromise dated 14.03.2026 Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the parties by making amicable settlement have resolved their inter se dispute and, therefore, it is submitted by them that the quashing of the aforementioned proceedings emanating therefrom, deserve to be allowed as AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.17 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-28598- 3. This Court vide order dated 20.05.2026 had directed the parties to appear before the learned Appellate Court to get their statements reco the learned Appellate Court was directed to send his report qua the genuineness of the compromise. 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the District and Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur has sent report dated 06.07.2026 to this Court alongwith photoco of the statements of complainant, petitioner recorded on 01.07.2026. 4. On the basis of these statements, it is submitted by learned Magistrate that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, out of free Will and without any pressure or coercion. It is also mentioned in the report that apart from the petitioners, there is no other accused in the complaint and that the present petitioners have not been declared proclaimed persons in this case. 5. I have the report by learned Judicial Magistrate, have also perused the record 6. It is well settled that the High Court has power to allow compounding of a non Section 482 of Cr.P.C. where it feels that the same is required to prevent the abuse of process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In this regard, reference can be made to a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Singh and others v. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 equally settled position of law that the power of High Court in quashing criminal -2026 (O&M) 2 This Court vide order dated 20.05.2026 had directed the parties to appear before the learned Appellate Court to get their statements reco the learned Appellate Court was directed to send his report qua the genuineness of the compromise. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the District and Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur has sent report dated 06.07.2026 to this Court alongwith photoco of the statements of complainant, petitioner-accused and Investigating Officer recorded on 01.07.2026. On the basis of these statements, it is submitted by learned Magistrate that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, out of Will and without any pressure or coercion. It is also mentioned in the report that apart from the petitioners, there is no other accused in the complaint and that the present petitioners have not been declared proclaimed persons in this I have heard learned counsel for the parties and besides perusing the report by learned Judicial Magistrate, have also perused the record It is well settled that the High Court has power to allow compounding of a non-compoundable offence and quash the prosec Section 482 of Cr.P.C. where it feels that the same is required to prevent the abuse of process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In this regard, reference can be made to a Full Bench judgment of this Court in and others v. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 equally settled position of law that the power of High Court in quashing criminal This Court vide order dated 20.05.2026 had directed the parties to appear before the learned Appellate Court to get their statements recorded and the learned Appellate Court was directed to send his report qua the genuineness Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the District and Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur has sent report dated 06.07.2026 to this Court alongwith photocopies accused and Investigating Officer On the basis of these statements, it is submitted by learned Magistrate that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, out of Will and without any pressure or coercion. It is also mentioned in the report that apart from the petitioners, there is no other accused in the complaint and that the present petitioners have not been declared proclaimed persons in this heard learned counsel for the parties and besides perusing the report by learned Judicial Magistrate, have also perused the record. It is well settled that the High Court has power to allow compoundable offence and quash the prosecution under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. where it feels that the same is required to prevent the abuse of process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In this regard, reference can be made to a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder and others v. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052. It is equally settled position of law that the power of High Court in quashing criminal This Court vide order dated 20.05.2026 had directed the parties to rded and the learned Appellate Court was directed to send his report qua the genuineness Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the District and Sessions Judge, pies accused and Investigating Officer On the basis of these statements, it is submitted by learned Magistrate that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, out of Will and without any pressure or coercion. It is also mentioned in the report that apart from the petitioners, there is no other accused in the complaint and that the present petitioners have not been declared proclaimed persons in this heard learned counsel for the parties and besides perusing . It is well settled that the High Court has power to allow ution under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. where it feels that the same is required to prevent the abuse of process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In this regard, Kulwinder . It is equally settled position of law that the power of High Court in quashing criminal AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.17 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-28598- proceedings or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is of wide plenitude with no statu exercised in cases where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. The High Court is required to consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate to put an end to the criminal case and if the such question is in affirmative, then the High Court is well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings. Reference in this context can be made to Hon’ble Apex Court judgments cited as another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 State of Punjab and another, 2014 (6) SCC 466. another judgment rendered Crl. L.R. (SC) 1527, or under Section 482 Cr.P.C., are exercisable in post where an appeal is pending before one or the other Judicial forum. This is on the premise that an order of conviction does not attain finality ti exhausted his/her legal remedies and the finality is sub Appellate Court. The pendency of legal proceedings, be that may before the final Court, is sine complete justice. Conversely, where a settlement has ensued post the attainment of all legal remedies, the annulment of proceedings on the basis of a compromise would be impermissible. Such an embargo is necessitated to -2026 (O&M) 3 proceedings or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation. Such power can certainly be exercised in cases where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. The High Court is required to consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate to put an end to the criminal case and if the such question is in affirmative, then the High Court is well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings. Reference in this context can be made to Hon’ble Apex Court judgments cited as Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and 2 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2014 (6) SCC 466. another judgment rendered in Ramawatar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 Crl. L.R. (SC) 1527, wherein, it was observed that the powers under Article 142 or under Section 482 Cr.P.C., are exercisable in post where an appeal is pending before one or the other Judicial forum. This is on the premise that an order of conviction does not attain finality ti exhausted his/her legal remedies and the finality is sub Appellate Court. The pendency of legal proceedings, be that may before the final Court, is sine-qua-non to involve the superior court’s plenary powers to do te justice. Conversely, where a settlement has ensued post the attainment of all legal remedies, the annulment of proceedings on the basis of a compromise would be impermissible. Such an embargo is necessitated to proceedings or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is of tory limitation. Such power can certainly be exercised in cases where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. The High Court is required to consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate to put an end to the criminal case and if the answer to such question is in affirmative, then the High Court is well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings. Reference in this context can be made to Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2014 (6) SCC 466. Reference can also be made to in Ramawatar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 hat the powers under Article 142 or under Section 482 Cr.P.C., are exercisable in post-conviction matters only where an appeal is pending before one or the other Judicial forum. This is on the premise that an order of conviction does not attain finality till the accused has exhausted his/her legal remedies and the finality is sub-judice before an Appellate Court. The pendency of legal proceedings, be that may before the non to involve the superior court’s plenary powers to do te justice. Conversely, where a settlement has ensued post the attainment of all legal remedies, the annulment of proceedings on the basis of a compromise would be impermissible. Such an embargo is necessitated to proceedings or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is of tory limitation. Such power can certainly be exercised in cases where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. The High Court is required to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law and whether to secure the ends of answer to such question is in affirmative, then the High Court is well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings. Reference in this context can be made to Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Narinder Singh and others vs. Reference can also be made to in Ramawatar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 hat the powers under Article 142 conviction matters only where an appeal is pending before one or the other Judicial forum. This is on the ll the accused has judice before an Appellate Court. The pendency of legal proceedings, be that may before the non to involve the superior court’s plenary powers to do te justice. Conversely, where a settlement has ensued post the attainment of all legal remedies, the annulment of proceedings on the basis of a compromise would be impermissible. Such an embargo is necessitated to AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.17 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-28598- prevent the accused from gaining an indefi settlement/compromise will always be loaded with lurking suspicion about its bona fide. It was also observed that the purpose of these extra was not to incentivise any hollow the victim but to do complete justice by effecting genuine settlement(s). 7. In view of the proposition of law as settled in the aforementioned cases, this Court finds that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse process of the Court in the fa squarely falls within the ambit and parameters settled by judicial precedents and that allowing and accepting the prayer of the petitioners by quashing dated 02.07.2015 registered under Sections 323 Chabbewal, District Hoshiarpur alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence both dated 09.08.2019, on the basis of compromise dated 14.03. (Annexure P-4) are quashed qua the petitioners. 16.07.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 4 prevent the accused from gaining an indefi settlement/compromise will always be loaded with lurking suspicion about its bona fide. It was also observed that the purpose of these extra was not to incentivise any hollow-hearted agreements between the accused the victim but to do complete justice by effecting genuine settlement(s). In view of the proposition of law as settled in the aforementioned cases, this Court finds that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse process of the Court in the facts and circumstances of the present case which squarely falls within the ambit and parameters settled by judicial precedents and that allowing and accepting the prayer of the petitioners by quashing dated 02.07.2015 registered under Sections 323, 325, 34 of IPC at Police Station Chabbewal, District Hoshiarpur alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence both dated 09.08.2019, on the basis of compromise dated 14.03. 4) are quashed qua the petitioners. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No prevent the accused from gaining an indefinite leverage, for such a settlement/compromise will always be loaded with lurking suspicion about its bona fide. It was also observed that the purpose of these extra-ordinary powers hearted agreements between the accused and the victim but to do complete justice by effecting genuine settlement(s). In view of the proposition of law as settled in the aforementioned cases, this Court finds that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse cts and circumstances of the present case which squarely falls within the ambit and parameters settled by judicial precedents and that allowing and accepting the prayer of the petitioners by quashing FIR No.83 , 325, 34 of IPC at Police Station Chabbewal, District Hoshiarpur alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence both dated 09.08.2019, on the basis of compromise dated 14.03.2026 (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No nite leverage, for such a settlement/compromise will always be loaded with lurking suspicion about its ordinary powers and In view of the proposition of law as settled in the aforementioned cases, this Court finds that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse cts and circumstances of the present case which squarely falls within the ambit and parameters settled by judicial precedents and FIR No.83 , 325, 34 of IPC at Police Station Chabbewal, District Hoshiarpur alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of 2026 AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.17 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.