CRM-M-10067 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 289 ALKA PRIYA AND OTHERS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present: Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Aiman J. Chishti, AAG, Punjab. M for respondent Nos.2 to 4. RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) 1. This is a petition filed under Section Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 28.03.2024, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120 Section 66D of the Information and Technology Act, 2 Sadar, Sangrur, District Sangrur, Punjab (Annexure P proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of (Annexure P-2) 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. 10067-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: ALKA PRIYA AND OTHERS Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Aiman J. Chishti, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Saurabh Sharma, 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 28.03.2024, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120 Section 66D of the Information and Technology Act, 2 Sadar, Sangrur, District Sangrur, Punjab (Annexure P proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of 2). This Court vide order dated 20.02.2026 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-10067-2026 Date of decision: 06.03.2026 ….Petitioners ....Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Ms. Aiman J. Chishti, AAG, Punjab. This is a petition filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik for quashing of FIR No.37, dated 28.03.2024, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC and Section 66D of the Information and Technology Act, 2000, at Police Station Sadar, Sangrur, District Sangrur, Punjab (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 20.01.2026 20.02.2026 had directed the parties 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 ....Respondents Bharatiya Nagarik FIR No.37, dated B IPC and 000, at Police Station subsequent 20.01.2026 had directed the parties 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 2026.03.10 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-10067 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the Judicial Magistrate the basis of the statements so recorded, Judicial Magistrate Sangrur has submitted report dated compromise has been effected between the partie any coercion or undue influence. 4. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No 4 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 appr Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120 Information and District Sangrur, Punjab (Annexure P therefrom on the basis of quashed. 7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), i of, accordingly. 06.03.2026 Gurpreet 10067-2026 2 Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the strate First Class, Sangrur and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, Judicial Magistrate has submitted report dated 05.03.2026 compromise has been effected between the partie any coercion or undue influence. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No 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 of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and appr Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 , this petition is allowed and FIR No.37, dated 28.03.2024, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120 Information and Technology Act, 2000, at Police Station Sadar, Sangrur, District Sangrur, Punjab (Annexure P-1) and therefrom on the basis of compromise dated Pending miscellaneous application(s), i 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, 05.03.2026 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 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.37, dated 28.03.2024, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC and Section 66D of the Technology Act, 2000, at Police Station Sadar, Sangrur, 1) and subsequent proceedings arising dated 20.01.2026 (Annexure P-2) are 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. On First Class, to the effect that the s 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 Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and oved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 FIR No.37, dated 28.03.2024, under B IPC and Section 66D of the Technology Act, 2000, at Police Station Sadar, Sangrur, subsequent proceedings arising are f any, stand(s) disposed (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) GURPREET 2026.03.10 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.