286 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-37513-2025 Date of Decision: 24.09.2025 Ram Pal Sharma alias Ram Pal and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present: Mr. Sunil Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab. Ms. Bindu Bala, Advocate for Mr. Vishal Munjal, Advocate for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4. *** AARADHNA SAWHNEY , J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, seeking quashing of FIR No.54 dated 27.04.2013 registered under Sections 323/324 of IPC, at Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P- 1) along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 01.07.2025 (Annexure P-2). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has fairly conceded that during the pendency of the proceedings, all the three petitioners were convicted by the Ld. trial Court for commission of offence punishable under Sections 324 & 323 read with Section 34 IPC and were sentenced to undergo for a period of one year R.I. During the pendency of the appeal, the matter was amicably settled between the parties. Unfortunately, the complainant Sh. Charan Dass passed away during the pendency of the proceedings. His legal heirs namely PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.09.25 18:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-37513-2025 -2- Samitra Devi @ Samitri Devi (wife), as also one of the other victim namely Geeta Sharma (daughter of the complainant), also executed the compromise. The matter was referred to the Court below for recording of statements of the parties and to report with respect to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The learned trial Court vide report dated 18.08.2025, has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure. 3. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 are represented by their counsel and admits the factum of compromise. 4. In view of the aforesaid report of the trial Court and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another”, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and “Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another”, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending, since the complainant has himself compromised the dispute with the petitioners/ accused persons. 5. In the circumstances, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.54 dated 27.04.2013 registered under Sections 323/324 of IPC, at Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioners. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) 24.09.2025 JUDGE Parveen kumar Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable :Yes/No PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.09.25 18:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document