IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 275 BALJINDER SINGH ALIAS ARMAN STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE M Present : Mr Mr. Akash Khurana Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Deify Jindal, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. KIRTI SINGH 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No. 67 dated 13.05.2025, under Sections 137(2) and 96 of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Sardulgarh, District Man arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 09.06.2025 (Annexure P-2). 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the case file. 3. This Court while issuing notice of motion vide 01.07.2025, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the compromise. 4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 25.07.2025 has been received from the Sub Divi IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M Date of decision: BALJINDER SINGH ALIAS ARMAN Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Mr. Lupil Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Sandeep, Advocate and Mr. Akash Khurana, Advocate for the Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Deify Jindal, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. **** KIRTI SINGH, J. (oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No. 67 dated 13.05.2025, under Sections 137(2) and 96 of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Sardulgarh, District Mansa and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 09.06.2025 (Annexure Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the This Court while issuing notice of motion vide 01.07.2025, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the compromise. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 25.07.2025 has been received from the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sardulgarh. A perusal of IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH M No.32461 of 2025 Date of decision: 30.07.2025 …. Petitioner …. Respondents KIRTI SINGH Lupil Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Sandeep, Advocate and , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Deify Jindal, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No. 67 dated 13.05.2025, under Sections 137(2) and 96 of BNS, 2023, registered at Police sa and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 09.06.2025 (Annexure Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 01.07.2025, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the compromise. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 25.07.2025 has been sional Judicial Magistrate, Sardulgarh. A perusal of The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No. 67 dated 13.05.2025, under Sections 137(2) and 96 of BNS, 2023, registered at Police sa and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 09.06.2025 (Annexure Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the order dated 01.07.2025, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 25.07.2025 has been sional Judicial Magistrate, Sardulgarh. A perusal of Jyoti 2025.07.31 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled between them and they have no objection in case t quashed. The compromise effected between them is genuine, without any undue influence and coercion. 5. The Full Bench of this Court in State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non compoundable offence(s) and quash the proceedings where the High Court is of the view that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure confined to matrimonial disputes alone. 6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Punjab and another, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 in order to secure Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment reads thus: “57. The posi summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal cour compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. xxx xxx xxx. ” CRM-M No.32461 of 2025 the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled between them and they have no objection in case t quashed. The compromise effected between them is genuine, without any undue influence and coercion. The Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non compoundable offence(s) and quash the proceedings where the High Court is of the view that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Punjab and another, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment reads thus:- 57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal cour compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. xxx xxx xxx. ” M No.32461 of 2025 -2- the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled between them and they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. The compromise effected between them is genuine, without any Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, held that the High Court has the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non- compoundable offence(s) and quash the proceedings where the High Court is of the view that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had observed that the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of tion that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled he FIR in question is quashed. The compromise effected between them is genuine, without any Kulwinder Singh and others vs. Court has - compoundable offence(s) and quash the proceedings where the High Court is of the view that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not Gian Singh vs. , had observed that the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of tion that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction t for Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of Jyoti 2025.07.31 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM 7. In view of the afore report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) and the complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a quietus to all disputes between t to bury the hatchet and lead a peaceful life. Thus, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings and in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings in the present case 8. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and 13.05.2025, under Sections 137(2) and 96 of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Sardulgarh, District Mansa quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 09.06.2025 (Annexure P-2), subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/ petitioner in the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh within a period of one month. 9. Pending 30.07.2025 Jyoti-IV CRM-M No.32461 of 2025 In view of the afore-referred judgments and after perusing the report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) and the complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a quietus to all disputes between the parties and it is in the interest of both sides to bury the hatchet and lead a peaceful life. Thus, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings and in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings in the present case deserve to be quashed. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and 13.05.2025, under Sections 137(2) and 96 of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Sardulgarh, District Mansa and all other consequential proceedings are qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 09.06.2025 2), subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/ petitioner in the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh within a period of one month. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (KIRTI SINGH Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No M No.32461 of 2025 -3- referred judgments and after perusing the report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) and the complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a he parties and it is in the interest of both sides to bury the hatchet and lead a peaceful life. Thus, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings and in order to secure the ends of justice, deserve to be quashed. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 67 dated 13.05.2025, under Sections 137(2) and 96 of BNS, 2023, registered at Police and all other consequential proceedings are qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 09.06.2025 2), subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner in the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh within a miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. KIRTI SINGH ) JUDGE Yes/No. Yes/No referred judgments and after perusing the report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) and the complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a he parties and it is in the interest of both sides to bury the hatchet and lead a peaceful life. Thus, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings and in order to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 67 dated 13.05.2025, under Sections 137(2) and 96 of BNS, 2023, registered at Police and all other consequential proceedings are qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 09.06.2025 to be deposited by the petitioner in the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh within a Jyoti 2025.07.31 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document