127+296 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-21161-2025 in/and CRM-M-41575-2024 Date of decision :28.07.2025 SIKANDER SINGH SIDHU @ MOTTU AND OTHERS ... Petitioners Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. A.S. Barnala, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Kamaldeep Sachdeva, Asstt. A.G., Punjab. Ms. Lovepreet Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (ORAL) CRM-21161-2025 The present application has been filed by the applicants- petitioners for addition of Section 201 IPC, 1860 in the head note as well as prayer clause of the main petition. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and Section 201 IPC, 1860 is added in the headnote as well as prayer clause of the main petition. CRM-M-41575-2024 The prayer in this petition is for quashing of an FIR No.35 dated 17.05.2022 registered under Sections 353, 332, 333, 341, 427, 506 and 34 IPC Section 3(1) of SC and ST Act, 1989 at Police Station Rureka Kalan, District Barnala along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties. JITESH LAL 2025.07.29 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-21161-2025 in/and CRM-M-41575-2024 -2- Vide order dated 28.08.2024 this Court had directed the parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded with regard to the compromise dated 07.08.2024 (P-2). The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was to submit a report in this regard giving certain details as enumerated in the said order. Pursuant to the order dated 28.08.2024 passed by this Court, the parties have appeared before the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Barnala and as per the report dated 05.12.2024 submitted to this Court, both the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. A perusal of the aforesaid report would show that the parties have effected a genuine compromise without there being any pressure, coercion or undue influence. In view of the compromise there is a remote possibility of the complainant coming forward to support the prosecution case. The powers under Section 482 Cr.PC can be exercised in such like situation in order to prevent unnecessary vagaries of criminal trial to be faced by the parties, when there are remote chances of conviction of the accused. The compromise in question is found to be fully in consonance with the direction issued by the Court in “Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543”. In view of the aforesaid report of the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Barnala accompanied by statements of both the JITESH LAL 2025.07.29 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-21161-2025 in/and CRM-M-41575-2024 -3- parties, the FIR No.35 dated 17.05.2022 registered under Sections 353, 332, 333, 341, 427, 506 and 34 IPC and Section 201 IPC (added later on) Section 3(1) of SC and ST Act, 1989 at Police Station Rureka Kalan, District Barnala along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners. Petition stands disposed of. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 28.07.2025 JITESH Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No JITESH LAL 2025.07.29 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document