CRM-M-64789-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 238 CRM-M-64789-2025 Decided on :17.07.2026 AMRITPAL SINGH ......Petitioners Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. G.S. Dhot, Advocate, and Mr. G.S. Mehra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Jasdeep Singh, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Gurvinder Singh Mehra, Advocate, for the complainant. SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1. Present petition has been filed u/s 528 BNSS of 2023, for quashing of DDR No.19 dated 07.08.2016 in FIR No.85, dated 06.08.2016 (Annexure P-1), registered U/s 307, 457, 325, 34 of IPC 1860, Police Station Jaitu, District Faridkot, and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom and setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.12.2024 (Annexure P-3) passed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot, in case, CIS No. SC/83/2018 against the present petitioner on the basis of compromise dated 20.02.2025 (Annexure P-5), effected between the parties. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that both the FIR and the cross-version were, in fact, registered at the instance of petitioner party. It is further submitted that, after learned trial Court convicted members of both the sides, parties entered into a compromise. Consequently, LAVISHA 2026.07.17 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-64789-2025 2 proceedings for quashing of the offence under Section 307 IPC in the FIR case have been initiated and the matter is now fixed before this Court for 27.07.2026. 3. Learned counsel further submits that, in the FIR case, accused Rajpal Singh, against whom the allegation of causing a firearm injury attracting Section 307 IPC was levelled, has already been acquitted by learned trial Court. It is also submitted that, in the cross-version, members of the petitioner party were similarly charged under Section 307 IPC. However, injuries in that case were allegedly caused by a sharp-edged weapon and not by use of a firearm. 4. Vide order dated 22.01.2026, the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise. 3. Report has since been received from learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jaitu, in pursuance to the directions of this Court wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report(s), compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the private respondents have also made statement to the effect that they would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioner is quashed. 4. The trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties in LAVISHA 2026.07.17 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-64789-2025 3 original, along with its report. The relevant part of the said report is reproduced herebelow:- Sr. No. Description 1. Total number of persons found involved as accused in the dispute/FIR Initially, there were two persons were arrayed as accused in the present DDR. However, accused namely Rajpal Singh was acquitted by trial Court, vide judgment dated 20.12.2024. Hence, as of now, there is only one accused in the present case. 2. Number of complainant/victim(s) Three victims/complainant 3. Whether all the accused and complainant / victims are party to compromise & signed the same Yes 4. In case, any affected person(accused or complainant) is left out or not arrayed as party in the quashing petition before High Court, detail whereas; Or His/her statement is till to be recorded, in compliance to the direction of this Court, details of such person No complainant/accused has been left out in the petition and all have been arrayed as party in the petition. 5. Whether any accused has been declared as a proclaimed offender/person or any such proceedings against him/her have been initiated or pending adjudication No 6. Report of the Court whether compromise is genuine, voluntary, and without any coercion or undue influence Yes 7. Any other aspect relevant to the present case. Nothing worth noticing reported 5. Learned State counsel too submits that there is no other accused other than the petitioner and the private respondents are the only aggrieved person in the DDR in question. LAVISHA 2026.07.17 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-64789-2025 4 6. In view of the report of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jaitu, and the principles laid down by Hon’ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed. 7. Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. 8. Petition stands disposed of. 17.07.2026 (SANJAY VASHISTH) Lavisha JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO LAVISHA 2026.07.17 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh