IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 269 AJAY PAL SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE M Present : Mr Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2. KIRTI SINGH 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No. 214 dated 18.10.2023, under Sections 498 Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the case file. 3. This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 04.07.2025, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Il Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the compromise. 4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 16.07.2025 has been received from the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Mukerian. A perusal of the said report reveals that s IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M Date of decision: AJAY PAL SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Mr. J.J. Uppal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** 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. 214 dated 18.10.2023, under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC, registered at Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 27.05.2025 (Annexure P Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 04.07.2025, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Il Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the compromise. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 16.07.2025 has been received from the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Mukerian. A perusal of the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH M No.34378 of 2025 Date of decision: 31.07.2025 …. Petitioner …. Respondents KIRTI SINGH , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No. 214 dated , 406 IPC, registered at Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur and all other consequential proceedings arising compromise dated 27.05.2025 (Annexure P-2). Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 04.07.2025, 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 16.07.2025 has been received from the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Mukerian. A perusal of tatements of the concerned persons have been The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No. 214 dated , 406 IPC, registered at Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur and all other consequential proceedings arising Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated laqa Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 16.07.2025 has been received from the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Mukerian. A perusal of tatements of the concerned persons have been Jyoti 2025.08.01 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM 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, wit 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 the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial dispute 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 the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can 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 c 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 just the process of any Court. xxx xxx xxx. ” 7. In view of the afore CRM-M No.34378 of 2025 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, wit 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 undable 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 c 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 just the process of any Court. xxx xxx xxx. ” In view of the afore-referred judgments and after perusing the M No.34378 of 2025 -2- 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- undable 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 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 in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of 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 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 referred judgments and after perusing the 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 hout any Kulwinder Singh and others vs. held that the High Court has - undable 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 Gian Singh vs. , had observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of 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 riminal court 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 ice or (ii) to prevent abuse of referred judgments and after perusing the Jyoti 2025.08.01 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) and the complainant, this Court 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 the criminal proceedings in the present case deserve to be quashed. 8. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and 18.10.2023, under Sections 498 Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 27.05.2025 (Annexure P-2), subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/ petitioner(s) in the Poor Patient Welfare F period of one month. 9. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. 31.07.2025 Jyoti-IV CRM-M No.34378 of 2025 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 the criminal proceedings in the present case deserve to be quashed. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and 18.10.2023, under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC, registered at Police Station trict Hoshiarpur and all other consequential proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 27.05.2025 2), subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/ petitioner(s) 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.34378 of 2025 -3- report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) 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 FIR No. 214 dated , 406 IPC, registered at Police Station and all other consequential proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 27.05.2025 2), subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/- to be deposited by the und, PGIMER, Chandigarh within a Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. KIRTI SINGH ) JUDGE Yes/No. Yes/No report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) 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 to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 214 dated , 406 IPC, registered at Police Station and all other consequential proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 27.05.2025 to be deposited by the und, PGIMER, Chandigarh within a Jyoti 2025.08.01 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document