IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 283 GURJEET SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE M Present : Mr Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Mr.Kulbir Singh Saini, Advocate for respondent No.2. KIRTI SINGH 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No.119 dated 29.06.2024, under Sections 406, 498 Women, District Mohali and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of th 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 10.07.2025, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/ 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 Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, SAS Nagar. A perusal of the said report reveals that sta in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled between IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M Date of decision: GURJEET SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Mr. Amandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Mr.Kulbir Singh Saini, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** KIRTI SINGH, J. (oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No.119 dated 29.06.2024, under Sections 406, 498-A of IPC, registered at Police Station Women, District Mohali and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 21.03.2025 (Annexure P Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 10.07.2025, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/ 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 Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, SAS Nagar. A perusal 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 between IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH M No.35936 of 2025 Date of decision: 28.07.2025 …. Petitioner …. Respondents KIRTI SINGH , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Mr.Kulbir Singh Saini, 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.119 dated A of IPC, registered at Police Station Women, District Mohali and all other consequential proceedings arising e compromise dated 21.03.2025 (Annexure P-2). Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 10.07.2025, 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 Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, SAS Nagar. A perusal of the tements of the concerned persons have been recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled between of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of FIR No.119 dated A of IPC, registered at Police Station Women, District Mohali 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 Illaqa Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 25.07.2025 has been received from the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, SAS Nagar. A perusal of the tements of the concerned persons have been recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled between Jyoti 2025.07.29 09:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM them and they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. The compromise effected between them is genuine, witho 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 disputes 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 b 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 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. 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. ” 7. In view of the af report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) CRM-M No.35936 of 2025 them and they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. The compromise effected between them is genuine, witho 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 dable 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 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 report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) M No.35936 of 2025 -2- 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 the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non- dable 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 e 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 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. 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 report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) them and they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. The ut any undue influence Kulwinder Singh and others vs. held that the High Court has - dable 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 e 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 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 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 report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner(s) Jyoti 2025.07.29 09:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM and the complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a quietus to all disputes between the parties and it is 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 present No.119 dated 29.06.2024, under Sections 406, 498 Police Station Women, District Mohali are quashed qua the petitioner(s) on 21.03.2025 (Annexure P by the petitioner(s) in the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh within a period of one month. 9. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. 28.07.2025 Jyoti-IV CRM-M No.35936 of 2025 and the complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a quietus to all disputes between the parties and it is 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 present No.119 dated 29.06.2024, under Sections 406, 498 Police Station Women, District Mohali and all other consequential proceedings are quashed qua the petitioner(s) on the basis of the compromise dated 21.03.2025 (Annexure P-2), subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/ 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.35936 of 2025 -3- 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 present FIR No.119 dated 29.06.2024, under Sections 406, 498-A of IPC, registered at and all other consequential proceedings the basis of the compromise dated 2), subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner(s) in the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. KIRTI SINGH ) JUDGE Yes/No. Yes/No and the complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a 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 A of IPC, registered at and all other consequential proceedings the basis of the compromise dated to be deposited by the petitioner(s) in the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh Jyoti 2025.07.29 09:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document