IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 303 SATNAM SINGH ALIAS SATTA AND ANR. STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. Present : Mr Advocate for Mr. Vivek Sharma, A.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. MANISHA BATRA 1. The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.80 dated 01.09.2023 registered under Sections 326, 324, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Division No.4, Ludhiana and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of co 2). 2 . This Court vide order dated 12.03.2025 had directed the parties to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness compromise. 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1 recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned submitted repor IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M Date of decision: SATNAM SINGH ALIAS SATTA AND ANR. Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Dhanpat Rai Singh, Advocate for Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Vivek Sharma, A.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (oral) The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.80 dated 01.09.2023 registered under Sections 326, 324, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Division No.4, Ludhiana and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 13.02.2025 (Annexure P This Court vide order dated 12.03.2025 had directed the parties to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned submitted report dated 29.04.2025 to the effect that the compromise has been IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH M No.13821 of 2025 Date of decision: 16.05.2025 SATNAM SINGH ALIAS SATTA AND ANR. …. Petitioners Versus …. Respondents MANISHA BATRA , Advocate for Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Mr. Vivek Sharma, A.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.80 dated 01.09.2023 registered under Sections 326, 324, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Division No.4, Ludhiana and all the subsequent proceedings mpromise dated 13.02.2025 (Annexure P- This Court vide order dated 12.03.2025 had directed the parties to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the , Ludhiana and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has t dated 29.04.2025 to the effect that the compromise has been The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.80 dated 01.09.2023 registered under Sections 326, 324, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Division No.4, Ludhiana and all the subsequent proceedings - This Court vide order dated 12.03.2025 had directed the parties to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded and the learned of the Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the , Ludhiana and got their statements has t dated 29.04.2025 to the effect that the compromise has been Jyoti 2025.05.19 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. 4. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 have not disputed the factum of com 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 Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303 this petition is allowed and FIR No.80 dated 01.09.2023 registe Sections 326, 324, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Division No.4, Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 13.02.2025 (Annexure P 16.05.2025 Jyoti-IV CRM-M No.13821 of 2025 effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 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’ble Supreme Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303 this petition is allowed and FIR No.80 dated 01.09.2023 registe Sections 326, 324, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Division No.4, Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 13.02.2025 (Annexure P-2) are quashed qua the petitioners. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No M No.13821 of 2025 -2- effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondents No.2 and promise 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 er Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and and approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and FIR No.80 dated 01.09.2023 registered under Sections 326, 324, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Division No.4, Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of 2) are quashed qua the petitioners. (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No. Yes/No effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondents No.2 and In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of er Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and and approved by the Hon’ble Supreme , red under Sections 326, 324, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Division No.4, Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of Jyoti 2025.05.19 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document