Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25825 (PNJ)

PAWAN KUMAR v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

CRM-M/8961/2025 · 2025-08-26

Rupinderjit Chahal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-8961-2025(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 285 CRM-M-8961-2025(O&M) Date of Decision: 26.08.2025 PAWAN KUMAR ....Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- Mr. Anterpreet Singh, Advocate and Mr. K.S. Sodhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Shukla, DAG, Punjab. None for respondent No.2. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 for quashing of FIR No. 48 dated 24.04.2024 registered under Sections 406 and 420 IPC and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act at Police Station Nakodar Sadar District Jalandhar Rural (Annexure P- 1), and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated 27.01.2025 (Annexure P-2). 2. This Court vide order dated 14.07.2025 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. 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nakodar and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has submitted report dated 30.07.2025 to the effect that the compromise has MOHIT 2025.08.28 18:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-8961-2025(O&M) -2- been effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. 4. Learned State counsel has 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 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 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 48 dated 24.04.2024 registered under Sections 406 and 420 IPC and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act at Police Station Nakodar Sadar District Jalandhar Rural (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated 27.01.2025 (Annexure P-2) are quashed qua the petitioner. 7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of, accordingly. (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) 26.08.2025 JUDGE Mohit Bishnoi Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MOHIT 2025.08.28 18:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document