CRM-M-13739 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 290 CHETAN SINGH AND OTHERS UT CHANDIGARH AND AN CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present: Mr. K.S. Derabassi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Narender Kumar Vashist, Addl. P.P. UT Chandigarh. Mr. Rajinder Yadav, Advocate for respondent No.2. RUPINDERJIT 1. This is a petition filed under Section Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 17.02.2026, under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) BNS, registered at Police Station Maloya, District C proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of (Annexure P-2) and compromise 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. 13739-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: CHETAN SINGH AND OTHERS Versus UT CHANDIGARH AND ANOTHER HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. K.S. Derabassi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Narender Kumar Vashist, Addl. P.P. UT Chandigarh. Mr. Rajinder Yadav, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) This is a petition filed under Section Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, for quashing of 17.02.2026, under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) BNS, registered at Police Station Maloya, District Chandigarh (Annexure P proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise 2) and compromise-2 dated 07.03.2026 (Annexure P This Court vide order dated 02.04.2026 ar 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-13739-2026 Date of decision: 27.04.2026 ….Petitioners ....Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Narender Kumar Vashist, Addl. P.P. UT Chandigarh. This is a petition filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik for quashing of FIR No.34, dated 17.02.2026, under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) BNS, registered at handigarh (Annexure P-1) and subsequent compromise-1 dated 03.03.2026 2 dated 07.03.2026 (Annexure P-3). 02.04.2026 had directed the parties ar before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness s ....Respondents Bharatiya Nagarik FIR No.34, dated 17.02.2026, under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) BNS, registered at subsequent 1 dated 03.03.2026 had directed the parties ar before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness MOHIT 2026.04.28 10:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-13739 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the Judicial Magistra On the basis of the statements so recorded, Chandigarh has submitted report dated compromise has been effected between the part any coercion or undue influence. 4. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. 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 Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) BNS, registered at Police Station Maloya, District Chandi arising therefrom on the basis of P-2) and compromise 7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of, accordingly. 27.04.2026 Gurpreet 13739-2026 2 Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandigarh and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, has submitted report dated 16.04.2026 compromise has been effected between the part any coercion or undue influence. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to tinue 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 Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 , this petition is allowed and FIR No.34, dated 17.02.2026, under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) BNS, registered at Police Station Maloya, District Chandigarh (Annexure P-1) and arising therefrom on the basis of compromise 2) and compromise-2 dated 07.03.2026 (Annexure P Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of, accordingly. i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, Judicial Magistrate First Class, 16.04.2026 to the effect that the compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to tinue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment 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 FIR No.34, dated 17.02.2026, under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) BNS, registered at Police Station 1) and subsequent proceedings compromise-1 dated 03.03.2026 (Annexure 2 dated 07.03.2026 (Annexure P-3) are quashed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the and got their statements recorded. , to the effect that the ies voluntarily and without Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2 In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 FIR No.34, dated 17.02.2026, under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) BNS, registered at Police Station subsequent proceedings 1 dated 03.03.2026 (Annexure Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) MOHIT 2026.04.28 10:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.