CRM-M-16015-2025(O&M) -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH 256 CRM-M-16015-2025(O&M) Date of Decision: 25.07.2025 Karamjot Singh & ors. ….. Petitioners VERSUS State of Punjab & anr. .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. Praagbir Singh Dhindsa, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab. Mr. C.L. Verma, Advocate for respondent No.2. NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL) CRM-27301-2025 Allowed as prayed for. Annexures A-1 to A-4 filed on behalf of the petitioners, are taken on record. Main case 1. By invoking Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of complaint case bearing No.COMI/57/2018 dated 01.08.2018 (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising thereof including the judgment dated 06.03.2024 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dasuya, whereby the petitioners have been convicted under Section 498-A of IPC, on the basis of compromise dated 05.03.2024 dated 05.03.2024 (Annexure P-3) arrived at between the parties. Monika Verma 2025.07.31 09:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh CRM-M-16015-2025(O&M) -2- 2. Learned counsel for the parties have stated that the present complaint including the orders of conviction and sentence may be quashed as the parties have amicably settled the dispute. 3. During the course of preliminary hearing, the trial Court was directed to record the statements of all the concerned parties, with regard to the genuineness and validity of the compromise by this Court. 4. In compliance thereof, report dated 13.05.2025 from learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dasuya, has been received through learned District and Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, with statements of the parties, in which, it has been mentioned that the compromise is genuine and there was no undue influence or coercion from any side. 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ramgopal and another versus State of Madhya Pradesh : 2021(4) RCR (Criminal) 322, has held that in non-compoundable cases of pre-dominantly private nature, even if compromise is reached after conviction, the proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Further, the compromise in the present case is found to be fully covered in consonance of judgments and the directions issued by the Court in Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab : 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Another : 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543. 6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in A.T. Sivaperumal versus Mohammed Hyath (D) by LRs. decided on 27.03.2017, has held that once the settlement between the parties has been arrived at, the conviction can also be set aside and the litigation too. Similar view has been taken by a Co- Monika Verma 2025.07.31 09:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh CRM-M-16015-2025(O&M) -3- ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Jagmohan Vs. Sandeep Aggarwal and another : 2021(4) RCR (Criminal) 86. 8. Having regard to the contentions of learned counsel for the parties and the fact that both the parties to the litigation have entered into compromise and on that basis, the present petition under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed for quashing the present FIR. The compromise has been arrived at with the intervention of the respectables and family members and the parties have decided to keep harmony between them and to live peacefully in future. Hence, it would be in the interest of justice that parties are allowed to compromise the matter. Moreover, learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that, in view of the settlement of disputes between the parties, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this context. 9. In view of above, the instant petition is allowed. Consequently, the impugned complaint case bearing No.COMI/57/2018 dated 01.08.2018 (Annexure P-1) and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment dated 06.03.2024 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dasuya, are hereby quashed, on the basis of compromise, qua the petitioners only, subject to deposit of an amount of Rs.10,000/- each as costs by the petitioners, with the Punjab & Haryana High Court Lawyers Welfare Fund within a period of two months from today. 25.07.2025 (NAMIT KUMAR) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Monika Verma 2025.07.31 09:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh