CRM-M-13819 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 277 JATINDER SINGH AND OTHERS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present: Mr. Mukesh Kumar Bhatnagar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ravneet Singh Lekhi, AAG, Punjab. Mr. for respondent Nos.2 to 4. RUPINDERJIT 1. This is a petition filed under Section Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 31.10.2021, under Sections 115(2), 333, 191, 190 BNS (Section 117 BNS added later on), at PS Dhilwan, District Kapurthala (Annexure P subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of 22.12.2025 (Annexure P 2. This to appear before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the compromise. 13819-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: JATINDER SINGH AND OTHERS Versus PUNJAB AND OTHERS HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Mukesh Kumar Bhatnagar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ravneet Singh Lekhi, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Bawa, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 4. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) This is a petition filed under Section Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, for quashing of 31.10.2021, under Sections 115(2), 333, 191, 190 BNS (Section 117 BNS added later on), at PS Dhilwan, District Kapurthala (Annexure P subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of 22.12.2025 (Annexure P-2). This Court vide order dated 25.03.2026 to appear before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the compromise. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-13819-2026 Date of decision: 17.04.2026 ….Petitioners ....Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Mukesh Kumar Bhatnagar, Advocate Mr. Ravneet Singh Lekhi, AAG, Punjab. Sanjeev Kumar Bawa, Advocate This is a petition filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik for quashing of FIR No.96, dated 31.10.2021, under Sections 115(2), 333, 191, 190 BNS (Section 117 BNS added later on), at PS Dhilwan, District Kapurthala (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 25.03.2026 had directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness s s Bharatiya Nagarik FIR No.96, dated 31.10.2021, under Sections 115(2), 333, 191, 190 BNS (Section 117 BNS 1) and dated had directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness GURPREET 2026.04.18 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-13819 3. Purs Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kapurthala On the basis of the statements so recorded, Kapurthala has submitted report dated compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. 4. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No 4 have not disputed the factum of compromise be 5. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. 6. Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and Sections 115(2), 333, 191, 190 BNS (Section 117 BNS added later on), at PS Dhilwan, District Kapurthala (Annexure P arising therefrom on the basis of 2) are quashed. 7. Pending miscellaneous appl of, accordingly. 17.04.2026 Gurpreet 13819-2026 2 Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the parties Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kapurthala and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, has submitted report dated 09.04.2026 compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No have not disputed the factum of compromise be In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 , this petition is allowed and FIR No.96, dated 31.10.2021, under 15(2), 333, 191, 190 BNS (Section 117 BNS added later on), at PS Dhilwan, District Kapurthala (Annexure P-1) and arising therefrom on the basis of compromise are quashed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of, accordingly. i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No the parties have appeared before and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, Judicial Magistrate First Class, 09.04.2026 to the effect that the compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent Nos.2 to have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment d others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 FIR No.96, dated 31.10.2021, under 15(2), 333, 191, 190 BNS (Section 117 BNS added later on), at PS 1) and subsequent proceedings compromise dated 22.12.2025 (Annexure P- ication(s), if any, stand(s) disposed (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No have appeared before and got their statements recorded. Judicial Magistrate First Class, to the effect that the compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without to In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment d others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 FIR No.96, dated 31.10.2021, under 15(2), 333, 191, 190 BNS (Section 117 BNS added later on), at PS subsequent proceedings - ication(s), if any, stand(s) disposed (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) GURPREET 2026.04.18 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.