Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29336 (PNJ)

HARINDER SINGH AND OTHERS v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CRM-M/11938/2024 · 2025-08-08

Aaradhna Sawhney

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-11938-2024 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 223 CRM-M-11938-2024 Date of Decision : 08.08.2025 HARINDER SINGH AND OTHERS ...Petitioners VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present: Mr. Prabhdeep Singh Toor, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab. Mr. Gurjant Singh Swaich, Advocate for respondents No.2 & 3. **** AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (ORAL) By way of present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioners seek quashing of FIR (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 29.01.2024 (Annexure P-2) executed between the parties. Details of the FIR are as follows: FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 128 04.10.2018 323, 324, 34 IPC (Section 201 IPC added later on in Challan) Doraha, Police District Khanna 2. With the intervention of respectables and elderly people of the society, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide compromise deed dated NISHA 2025.08.11 09:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11938-2024 -2- 29.01.2024 (Annexure P-2), which is duly signed by them. The matter was referred to the learned trial Court for recording of statements of the parties and to report with respect to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Payal vide report dated 05.07.2024 has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure. 3. Respondents No. 2 & 3 are represented by their counsel and do not oppose the compromise. 4. In view of the aforesaid report of the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Payal and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another”, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and “Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another”, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose can be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending, since the complainant has himself compromised the dispute with the petitioners/ accused persons. 5. In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.128 dated 04.10.2018, under Sections 323, 324, 34 of IPC (Section 201 of IPC added later on in Challan), registered at Police Station Doraha, Police District Khanna (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioners. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE 08.08.2025 Nisha Yadav Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NISHA 2025.08.11 09:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document