CRM-M-60661-2024 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 225 CRM-M-60661-2024 Date of Decision: 08.08.2025 GURPREET SINGH AND OTHERS ......... Petitioners Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present : Mr. P.S. Paul, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Rajinder Yadav, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 4. **** YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR , J. (Oral) 1. Prayer in this petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) is for quashing of F.I.R. No.303 dated 23.10.2024, registered under Sections Sections 331(4), 305 of BNSS, at Police Station Sohana, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. 2. This Court vide order dated 13.01.2025 had directed the parties to appear before the Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send his/her report qua the genuineness of the compromise. Pooja Saini 2025.08.13 10:41 I attest the integrity and accuracy of this order/judgment CRM-M-60661-2024 2 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, SAS Nagar, and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has submitted report dated 15.02.2025 to the effect that the compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. 4. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. 5. In the present case, the incident does not pertain to a broad day light robbery and in fact this is a dispute between the family, which resulted in the present FIR. Hon’ble the Supreme Court while deciding criminal appeal No. 2094 of 2011, Shiji @ Pappu and others Versus Radhika and another, vide judgment dated 14.11.2011, allowed the parties to get the FIR quashed in a similar case where incident did not relate to broad day light robbery and the dispute was civil in nature, which was stated to be resolved. Similar view has been taken by co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Paramjit Singh and others Versus State of Haryana, CRM-M-56554-2023, decided on 05.02.2024 and Daleep Kumar and others Versus State of Punjab and another, CRM-M-12295- 2021, decided on 18.05.2022. 6. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant F.I.R. Pooja Saini 2025.08.13 10:41 I attest the integrity and accuracy of this order/judgment CRM-M-60661-2024 3 This petition is allowed and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise qua petitioner(s), are hereby quashed. ( YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR ) JUDGE 08.08.2025 pooja saini Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Pooja Saini 2025.08.13 10:41 I attest the integrity and accuracy of this order/judgment