IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 271 BALKAR SINGH STATE OF PUNJA CORAM: HON’BLE M Present : Mr Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Ms. Himani, Advocate for Mr. Kulwinder Kally, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. KIRTI SINGH 1. The present petition Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No. 57 dated 30.05.2024, under Sections 363, 366 of IPC, registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 03.06.2025(Annexure P 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 07.07.2025, 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 28.07.2025 has been received from the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Nak report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M Date of decision: BALKAR SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Mr. Raman Kumar, Advocate for the Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Ms. Himani, Advocate for Mr. Kulwinder Kally, 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. 57 dated 30.05.2024, under Sections 363, 366 of IPC, registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar Rural, Jalandhar proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 03.06.2025(Annexure P-2). Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated irected 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 28.07.2025 has been received from the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Nak report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH M No.34611 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. Kulwinder Kally, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No. 57 dated 30.05.2024, under Sections 363, 366 of IPC, registered at Police Station Rural, Jalandhar and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated irected 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 28.07.2025 has been received from the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Nakodar. A perusal of the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No. 57 dated 30.05.2024, under Sections 363, 366 of IPC, registered at Police Station ntial proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated irected the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 28.07.2025 has been odar. A perusal of the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in Jyoti 2025.08.01 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM 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 undue influence and coercion. 5. The Full Bench of this Court in State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the power under Section 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 o 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 the ends of justice or to prevent 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 d 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 und 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 xxx xxx xxx. ” 7. In view of the afore CRM-M No.34611 of 2025 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 undue influence 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 o 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 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 d 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 process of any Court. xxx xxx xxx. ” In view of the afore-referred judgments and after perusing the M No.34611 of 2025 -2- 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 undue influence Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, held that the High Court has 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 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 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 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 er 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 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 undue influence Kulwinder Singh and others vs. held that the High 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 f quashing is not Gian Singh vs. , had observed that 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 iscussion 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 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 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 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. 8. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and 30.05.2024, under Sections 363, 366 of IPC, registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar Rural, Jalandhar proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 03.06.2025 (Annexure P deposited by the petitioner(s) in the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh wit 9. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. 31.07.2025 Jyoti-IV CRM-M No.34611 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 to secure the ends of justice, proceedings in the present case deserve to be quashed. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and 30.05.2024, under Sections 363, 366 of IPC, registered at Police Station District Jalandhar Rural, Jalandhar proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 03.06.2025 (Annexure P-2), subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/ deposited by the 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.34611 of 2025 -3- 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, proceedings in the present case deserve to be quashed. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 57 dated 30.05.2024, under Sections 363, 366 of IPC, registered at Police Station District Jalandhar Rural, Jalandhar and all other consequential proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise 2), subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner(s) in the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, 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) 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, FIR No. 57 dated 30.05.2024, under Sections 363, 366 of IPC, registered at Police Station her consequential proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise to be deposited by the petitioner(s) in the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Jyoti 2025.08.01 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document