CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----29291 29291 29291 29291---- 291 291 291 291 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Gurnam Singh State of Punjab CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: Present: Present: Present: Present:- SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) of FIR No.71 195-A, 196, 149 at Police Station arising therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P- 2. ----2025 2025 2025 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Gurnam Singh and others versus Punjab and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Ms. Navjot Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Gaurav Gurcharan Singh Rai, Senior DAG Punjab. Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Mandeep Kanwar, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. ***** ***** ***** ***** SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) 71 dated 25.04.2024 (Annexure P A, 196, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), at Police Station Dharmkot, District Moga arising therefrom on the basis of compromise -2), which is stated to have been effected between the parties. On 09.07.2025, the following order was passed: “The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of FIR (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a compromise having been effected between the parties. Notice of motion. 1111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT AT AT AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----29291 29291 29291 29291----2025 2025 2025 2025 Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: August 18 August 18 August 18 August 18, 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 ….Petitioners ….Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Gurcharan Singh Rai, Senior DAG Punjab. Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Mandeep Kanwar, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for quashing (Annexure P-1), under Sections 451, 323, of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), registered and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated 14.05.2025 which is stated to have been effected between the parties. the following order was passed: The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of 1) and all consequential proceedings basis of a compromise having been 1111 2025 2025 2025 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 s s of the for quashing 451, 323, registered proceedings .2025 The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of 1) and all consequential proceedings basis of a compromise having been MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.22 14:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----29291 29291 29291 29291---- ----2025 2025 2025 2025 At this stage, Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1 Punjab and accepts notice. Mr. Mandeep Kanwar, Advocate has entered appearance on behalf of Mr. Harvinder Singh, Advocate and filed vakalatnama for respondent Nos.2 record. The parties are directed to get their statements recorded qua the factum of compromise in the following manner: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate concerned on or any date thereafter Magistrate for recording petitioner as well as of factum of compromise. As and when any such appearance is made, the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall do statements of the parties qua compromise. It shall be open to the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate to either record the statements of the parties by physical process or by video conferencing as trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. (ii) In case the statement is to be recorded by way of video conferencing, the partie be duly identified their respective counsel, of the Presiding Officer. (iii) The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate may also choose to get the statements of the parties recorded through some Commissioner, appointed by the Court who would be some sufficient standing at the Bar. In case the is recorded through some Commissioner, such Commissioner/Advocate shall furnish an affidavit after recording statements to t parties had appeared before him/her and he/she had recorded their the said parties had been duly respective counsel. This shall be subject satisfaction of trial Court/Illaqa Magistrat After recording the statements of all the affected parties in either of the aforesaid manner, the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall submit its report so recorded as to whether all the affected parties into a compromise and as to whether the compromise in 2222 At this stage, Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab appearance on behalf of respondent No.1-State of . Mandeep Kanwar, Advocate has entered appearance of Mr. Harvinder Singh, Advocate and filed vakalatnama for respondent Nos.2 & 3. The same be taken on The parties are directed to get their statements recorded compromise in the following manner: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Magistrate concerned on 16.07.2025 or any date thereafter as fixed by trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording statements of the petitioner as well as of the complainant qua the factum of compromise. As and when any such appearance is made, the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall do the needful for recording the statements of the parties qua the factum of the compromise. It shall be open to the trial Illaqa Magistrate to either record the parties by physical process or by video conferencing as deemed appropriate by the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. (ii) In case the statement is to be recorded by way conferencing, the parties concerned shall through video conferencing by their respective counsel, subject to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer. (iii) The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate may also the statements of the parties recorded Commissioner, appointed by the Court who would be some Advocate having sufficient standing at the Bar. In case the statement is recorded through some Commissioner, such Commissioner/Advocate shall furnish an affidavit recording statements to the effect that the appeared before him/her and he/she had recorded their statements as per law and that the said parties had been duly identified by their respective counsel. This shall be subject to satisfaction of trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. After recording the statements of all the affected parties of the aforesaid manner, the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall submit its report on the basis of the statements so recorded as to whether all the affected parties have entered into a compromise and as to whether the compromise in 2222 At this stage, Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab State of . Mandeep Kanwar, Advocate has entered appearance of Mr. Harvinder Singh, Advocate and filed & 3. The same be taken on The parties are directed to get their statements recorded (i) The petitioner shall appear before the trial .07.2025 as fixed by trial Court/Illaqa statements of the the factum of compromise. As and when any such appearance is made, the trial Court/Illaqa the needful for recording the the factum of the compromise. It shall be open to the trial Illaqa Magistrate to either record the parties by physical process or by deemed appropriate by the (ii) In case the statement is to be recorded by way s concerned shall through video conferencing by subject to the satisfaction (iii) The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate may also the statements of the parties recorded Commissioner, appointed by the Advocate having statement is recorded through some Commissioner, such Commissioner/Advocate shall furnish an affidavit he effect that the appeared before him/her and he/she statements as per law and that identified by their to After recording the statements of all the affected parties of the aforesaid manner, the trial Court/Illaqa on the basis of the statements have entered into a compromise and as to whether the compromise in MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.22 14:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----29291 29291 29291 29291---- 3. the Judicial Magistrate record. As per the report, the Trial ----2025 2025 2025 2025 question is found to be a valid compromise and has been effected without there being any The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall also report as regards the following facts after seeking information from Investigating Officer, concerned: (i) Whether there is any other accused other than the petitioner, arrayed in this petition? (ii) Whether there is any other complainant or affected/ aggrieved party other than the respondents, arrayed in the petition? (iii) Whether any accused has been declared Proclaimed Offender? The report be submitted before this Court before the next date of hearing i.e. 05.08.2025.” Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Moga has been received, which is taken on record. As per the report, the Trial Court has recorded as follows: “(i) As per statement of 10, a total of eight persons, namely Balkar Singh son of Karnail village Chamb. Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga. Gulzar Singh son of Karnail Singh resident of village Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Jagir Singh son of Darshan Singh resident of village Thuthgarh, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Singh resident of village Chamb. District Moga, Amarjit Kaur @ Sheelo wife of Darshan Singh resident of village Thuthgarh, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Mukhtiar Singh son of Karnail Singh resident of village Chamb, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Pritam Kaur @ Preeto wife of Karnail Singh resident of village Chamb, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Gurnam Singh son of Makhan Singh resident of village Rajewal. Talwandi Butian, District Jalandhar have been found involved as accused in the present FIR. (ii) As per statement of IO, there is only one complainant/victim in this case, namely Surjit Singh and respondent/complainant/eye witness namely Jagdish Singh. (iii) As per the statement of 10 neither any proclamation proceedings are pending against either of 3333 is found to be a valid compromise and has been effected without there being any kind of influence or coercion. The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall also report as ollowing facts after seeking information from Investigating Officer, concerned: (i) Whether there is any other accused other than the arrayed in this petition? (ii) Whether there is any other complainant or affected/ n the respondents, arrayed in the (iii) Whether any accused has been declared Proclaimed The report be submitted before this Court before the next ” Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 28.07.2025 from has been received, which is taken on Court has recorded as follows: As per statement of 10, a total of eight persons, namely Balkar Singh son of Karnail Singh resident of Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga. Gulzar Singh son of Karnail Singh resident of village Chamb, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Jagir Singh son of Singh resident of village Thuthgarh, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Kakkar Singh son of Channan Singh resident of village Chamb. Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Amarjit Kaur @ Sheelo wife of Darshan Singh resident of village Thuthgarh, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Mukhtiar Singh son of Karnail Singh ge Chamb, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Pritam Kaur @ Preeto wife of Karnail Singh resident of village Chamb, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Gurnam Singh son of Makhan Singh resident of Talwandi Butian, District Jalandhar involved as accused in the present FIR. As per statement of IO, there is only one complainant/victim in this case, namely Surjit Singh and respondent/complainant/eye witness namely Jagdish As per the statement of 10 neither any proclamation proceedings are pending against either of 3333 is found to be a valid compromise and has been The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall also report as ollowing facts after seeking information from (i) Whether there is any other accused other than the (ii) Whether there is any other complainant or affected/ n the respondents, arrayed in the (iii) Whether any accused has been declared Proclaimed The report be submitted before this Court before the next from has been received, which is taken on As per statement of 10, a total of eight persons, Singh resident of Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga. Gulzar Chamb, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Jagir Singh son of Singh resident of village Thuthgarh, Tehsil Kakkar Singh son of Channan Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Amarjit Kaur @ Sheelo wife of Darshan Singh resident of village Thuthgarh, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Mukhtiar Singh son of Karnail Singh ge Chamb, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Pritam Kaur @ Preeto wife of Karnail Singh resident of village Chamb, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Gurnam Singh son of Makhan Singh resident of Talwandi Butian, District Jalandhar As per statement of IO, there is only one complainant/victim in this case, namely Surjit Singh and respondent/complainant/eye witness namely Jagdish As per the statement of 10 neither any proclamation proceedings are pending against either of MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.22 14:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----29291 29291 29291 29291---- proceedings are not pending against any of the parties to the 4. parties having compromised FIR and all proceedings subsequent thereto against the petitioners are quashed. 5. the FIR is quashed based upon the compromise (Annexure P 6. gone through the records of the case. 7. with the issue of exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code to quash proceeding in non vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of ----2025 2025 2025 2025 the parties nor any of the accused has been declared Proclaimed Offender. 4. Therefore, from the statements of the parties to the case, this Court is satisfied that the compromise in the present ca genuine, voluntary and the same has been arrived at without any kind of undue influence or coercion. Moreover, PO proceedings are not pending against any of the parties to the case. The original statements of all the parties and the Investigating Officer of the case mentioned above are attached herewith. The report is hereby submitted please for your kind perusal. I am highly obliged.” Learned counsel for respondent parties having compromised, and states that he has no objection in case the FIR and all proceedings subsequent thereto against the petitioners are Similarly, learned State counsel has stated no objection in case the FIR is quashed based upon the compromise (Annexure P I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the records of the case. This Court and the Hon’ble Apex Court has repeatedly dealt with the issue of exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code to sh proceeding in non-compoundable offences in the cases of vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of 4444 the parties nor any of the accused has been declared Therefore, from the statements of the parties to the case, this Court is satisfied that the compromise in the present case is genuine, voluntary and the same has been arrived at without any kind of undue influence or coercion. Moreover, PO proceedings are not pending against any of the parties to the case. The original statements of all the parties and the icer of the case mentioned above are attached The report is hereby submitted please for your kind perusal. I Learned counsel for respondents No.2 & 3 admits the fact of and states that he has no objection in case the FIR and all proceedings subsequent thereto against the petitioners are Similarly, learned State counsel has stated no objection in case the FIR is quashed based upon the compromise (Annexure P-2). I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully This Court and the Hon’ble Apex Court has repeatedly dealt with the issue of exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code to compoundable offences in the cases of Gian Singh Gian Singh Gian Singh Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303, Kulwinder Singh & Kulwinder Singh & Kulwinder Singh & Kulwinder Singh & others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of 4444 the parties nor any of the accused has been declared Therefore, from the statements of the parties to the case, se is genuine, voluntary and the same has been arrived at without any kind of undue influence or coercion. Moreover, PO proceedings are not pending against any of the parties to the case. The original statements of all the parties and the icer of the case mentioned above are attached The report is hereby submitted please for your kind perusal. I admits the fact of and states that he has no objection in case the FIR and all proceedings subsequent thereto against the petitioners are Similarly, learned State counsel has stated no objection in case I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully This Court and the Hon’ble Apex Court has repeatedly dealt with the issue of exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code to Gian Singh Gian Singh Gian Singh Gian Singh Kulwinder Singh & Kulwinder Singh & Kulwinder Singh & Kulwinder Singh & and Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th of MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.22 14:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----29291 29291 29291 29291---- September, 2021) September, 2021) September, 2021) September, 2021) decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court and as the statutory provision of Section 482 of Cr. said principles of law would apply to a petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 as well. ----2025 2025 2025 2025 September, 2021) September, 2021) September, 2021) September, 2021). The proposition of law that emerges from the aforesaid decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court and (a) Power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. vested with this Court is much wider and is unaffected by Section 320 of the Code. (b) However, wider the power greater the caution. (c) The underlining principle while exercising such power is that it can be invoked to quash the proceedings recognizing compromise between the matters which are overwhelmingly and predominantly of civil character like commercial of matrimonial relationship or family disputes. (d) The said power is not to be exercised in the prosecutions involving heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity etc. as such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. (e) Section 482 Cr.P.C. casts duty upon the High Court to advance interest of justice as well. It is in recognition of this duty casted upon the High Court, that Apex Court held that the High Court under Section 307 merely thereof. High Court can assess sustained, whether such injuries inflicted on parts of the body/nature of weapons (f) Such exercise at the hands of High Court would be permissible only after the eviden investigation and charge during the trial. Such exercise while the matter is still under investigation. (g) While quashing FIR in non which are of private in nature, High Court is required consider antecedents of the accused, conduct of the accused and whether he was absconding or whether he has managed the complainant to enter into a The statutory provision of Section 528 of BNSS, as the statutory provision of Section 482 of Cr. said principles of law would apply to a petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 as well. 5555 . The proposition of law that emerges from the aforesaid decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court and this Court is: Power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. vested with this Court is much unaffected by Section 320 of the Code. However, wider the power greater the caution. The underlining principle while exercising such power is invoked to quash the proceedings recognizing compromise between the parties in the which are overwhelmingly and predominantly of character like commercial transactions or arising out relationship or family disputes. said power is not to be exercised in the prosecutions involving heinous and serious offences of mental offences like murder, rape, dacoity etc. as private in nature and have a serious Cr.P.C. casts duty upon the High Court to interest of justice as well. It is in recognition of upon the High Court, that Apex Court held that the High Court would not refuse to quash FIR under Section 307 merely because FIR finds mention thereof. High Court can assess nature of injuries sustained, whether such injuries inflicted on vital/delicate parts of the body/nature of weapons used etc. Such exercise at the hands of High Court would be only after the evidence is collected after and charge-sheet is filed/charges framed during the trial. Such exercise cannot be carried out while the matter is still under investigation. While quashing FIR in non-compoundable offences even private in nature, High Court is required to consider antecedents of the accused, conduct of the accused and whether he was absconding or whether he has managed the complainant to enter into a compromise. The statutory provision of Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 is same as the statutory provision of Section 482 of Cr. P.C. Therefore, the above said principles of law would apply to a petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 5555 . The proposition of law that emerges from the aforesaid Power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. vested with this Court is much The underlining principle while exercising such power is invoked to quash the proceedings parties in the which are overwhelmingly and predominantly of transactions or arising out said power is not to be exercised in the prosecutions involving heinous and serious offences of mental offences like murder, rape, dacoity etc. as private in nature and have a serious Cr.P.C. casts duty upon the High Court to interest of justice as well. It is in recognition of upon the High Court, that Apex Court would not refuse to quash FIR ention nature of injuries vital/delicate Such exercise at the hands of High Court would be ce is collected after framed cannot be carried out compoundable offences even to consider antecedents of the accused, conduct of the accused and whether he was absconding or whether he compromise. 2023 is same above said principles of law would apply to a petition under Section 528 of BNSS, MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.22 14:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----29291 29291 29291 29291---- 8. this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise jurisdiction vested u/s 9. 25.04.2024 (Annexure P Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), registered at Police Station Dharmkot, District Moga therefrom on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated P-2), are, hereby, quashed 10. August 18 August 18 August 18 August 18, 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: ----2025 2025 2025 2025 Thus, keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, s of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise jurisdiction vested u/s 528 of BNSS, 2023 to quash the FIR as: (i) Putting a quietus to the proceedings will bring peace and tranquility amongst parties & will accordingly further the cause of substantial justice (ii) The offences alleged are primarily of private nature; (iii) The parties have compromised (iv) As per the report received the compromise is said to be voluntary in its nature; (v) Complainant/victim is reported to have entered compromise on his own volition. Consequently, the petition is allowed. 25.04.2024 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 451, 323, 195 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), registered at Police Station Dharmkot, District Moga and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated ), are, hereby, quashed qua the petitioners. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No 6666 Thus, keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, s of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise to quash the FIR as: Putting a quietus to the proceedings will bring peace and tranquility amongst parties & will accordingly further the substantial justice; re primarily of private nature; The parties have compromised; As per the report received the compromise is said to be Complainant/victim is reported to have entered into compromise on his own volition. Consequently, the petition is allowed. FIR No.71 dated 451, 323, 195-A, 196, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), registered at Police Station and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated 14.05.2025 (Annexure the petitioners. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ((((SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL)))) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE 6666 Thus, keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, s of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise Putting a quietus to the proceedings will bring peace and tranquility amongst parties & will accordingly further the As per the report received the compromise is said to be into dated of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), registered at Police Station and all consequential proceedings arising (Annexure MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.22 14:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment