CRM-M-62856 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 363 HARPAL SINGH AND OTHERS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present: Mr. Angraze Singh Dhindsa, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Vivek Sharma, AAG, Punjab. Ms. Prabhjot Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2. RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) 1. This is a petition filed under Section Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 07.04.2022, under Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC and (Section 201 of IPC added later on), at Police Station Sanaur, District Pa and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of dated 06.08.2024 (Annexure P 2. The co had directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa/Duty Magi their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the compromise. 62856-2024 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: HARPAL SINGH AND OTHERS Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Angraze Singh Dhindsa, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Vivek Sharma, AAG, Punjab. Ms. Prabhjot Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) This is a petition filed under Section Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, for quashing of 07.04.2022, under Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC and (Section 201 of IPC added later on), at Police Station Sanaur, District Pa subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of 06.08.2024 (Annexure P-2). The co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated had directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa/Duty Magi 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-62856-2024 Date of decision: 30.03.2026 ….Petitioners ....Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Angraze Singh Dhindsa, Advocate Mr. Vivek Sharma, AAG, Punjab. This is a petition filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik for quashing of FIR No.28, dated 07.04.2022, under Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC and (Section 201 of IPC added later on), at Police Station Sanaur, District Patiala (Annexure P-1) subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise Court vide order dated 16.12.2024 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 of the compromise. s ....Respondents Bharatiya Nagarik FIR No.28, dated 07.04.2022, under Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC and (Section 201 of 1) compromise 16.12.2024 strate to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its GURPREET 2026.04.02 19:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-62856 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, the basis of the statements so recorded, has submitted report compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and any coercion or undue influence. 4. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2 and 3 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 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’bl Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC and (Section 201 of IPC added later on), at Police Station Sanaur, District Patiala (Annexure P proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of (Annexure P-2) 7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of, accordingly. 30.03.2026 Gurpreet 62856-2024 2 Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patiala and go the basis of the statements so recorded, Judicial Magistrate First Class, has submitted reports dated 01.03.2025 and 27.11.2025 compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and 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 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’bl Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 , this petition is allowed and FIR No.28, dated 07.04.2022, under Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC and (Section 201 of IPC added later on), at Police Station Sanaur, District Patiala (Annexure P proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of 2) are quashed. 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 Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patiala 27.11.2025 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 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.28, dated 07.04.2022, under Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC and (Section 201 of IPC added later on), at Police Station Sanaur, District Patiala (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 06.08.2024 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 t their statements recorded. On Patiala to the effect that the 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 e Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 FIR No.28, dated 07.04.2022, under Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC and (Section 201 of IPC added later on), subsequent 4 Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) GURPREET 2026.04.02 19:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.