259 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 1. RAMESH KUMAR JAIN AND SANMATI VIMAL 2. SURJIT SINGH PUNIA SANMATI VIMAL JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL JAGRAON 3. BIPAN SYNGAL SANMATI VIMAL JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL JAGRAON 4. KIRTI SAGAR PRABHAKAR SANMATI VIMAL JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL JAGRAON CORAM: HON’BLE MR. Present: Mr. Mr. Viren Jain, Advocate Mr. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RAMESH KUMAR JAIN AND OTHERS V/S SANMATI VIMAL JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL, JAGRAON SURJIT SINGH PUNIA V/S SANMATI VIMAL JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL JAGRAON BIPAN SYNGAL V/S SANMATI VIMAL JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL JAGRAON KIRTI SAGAR PRABHAKAR V/S SANMATI VIMAL JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL JAGRAON HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Tarranum Madaan, Advocate and Mr. Viren Jain, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Chanakya Batta, Advocate for the respondent(s). **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 22.05.2025 CRM-M-44680-2024 ...PETITIONERS JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL, JAGRAON ...RESPONDENT CRM-M-9796-2025 ...PETITIONER SANMATI VIMAL JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL JAGRAON ...RESPONDENT CRM-M-12808-2025 ...PETITIONER SANMATI VIMAL JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL JAGRAON ...RESPONDENT CRM-M-18650-2025 ...PETITIONER SANMATI VIMAL JAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL JAGRAON ...RESPONDENT HARPREET SINGH BRAR and for the petitioners. Chanakya Batta, Advocate for the respondent(s). MANISHA 2025.05.23 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-44680 & 03 connected cases HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. This order of mine shall dispose of all the afore petitions as all are arising out of the same complaint. For the sake of brevity, facts are taken from Others vs. Sanmati Vimal Jain Public School, 2. This petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS (read with Section 482 Cr.P.C) praying for quashing of criminal complaint bearing complaint titled “Sanmati Vimal Jain Vs. Ramesh K bearing No.31/1 (COMI subsequent summoning order dated 14.06. Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 46 467, 468, 469, 471 & 120 emanating therefrom, on the basis of compromise/memorandum of settlement dated 21.07.2024 (Annexure P 2. The following order was passed on 44680-2024 2 & 03 connected cases HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) This order of mine shall dispose of all the afore petitions as all are arising out of the same complaint. For the sake of brevity, facts are taken from CRM-M-44680-2024 titled as Sanmati Vimal Jain Public School, Jagraon This petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS (read with Section 482 Cr.P.C) praying for quashing of criminal complaint bearing complaint titled “Sanmati Vimal Jain Vs. Ramesh K 31/1 (COMI-34821-2013) dated 30.01.2004 as well as the subsequent summoning order dated 14.06.2004 Judicial Magistrate, Jagraon whereby the petitioners have been summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 46 467, 468, 469, 471 & 120-B of IPC along with all the subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of compromise/memorandum of settlement dated 21.07.2024 (Annexure P-3). The following order was passed on “Through the instant petition, prayer is made for quashing of Criminal complaint titled “Sanmati Vimal Jain Vs. Ramesh Kumar Jain and others” bearing No.31/1 (COMI 30.1.2004 (Annexure P-1) as well as the subsequent summoning order dated 14.6.2004 passed by th 1st Class, Ludhiana, whereby, the petitioners have been summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471 and 120 subsequent proceedings enumerating therefro compromise/memorandum of settlement dated 21.7.2024 (Annexure P-3). Notice of motion. This order of mine shall dispose of all the afore-mentioned petitions as all are arising out of the same complaint. For the sake of brevity, titled as Ramesh Kumar Jain and Jagraon. This petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS (read with Section 482 Cr.P.C) praying for quashing of criminal complaint bearing complaint titled “Sanmati Vimal Jain Vs. Ramesh Kumar Jain & Others” dated 30.01.2004 as well as the passed by the Court of learned whereby the petitioners have been summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, B of IPC along with all the subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of compromise/memorandum of settlement The following order was passed on 02.12.2024 :- nt petition, prayer is made for quashing of Criminal complaint titled “Sanmati Vimal Jain Vs. Ramesh Kumar Jain and others” bearing No.31/1 (COMI-34821-2013) of 1) as well as the subsequent summoning order dated 14.6.2004 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana, whereby, the petitioners have been summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471 and 120-B IPC alongwith all the subsequent proceedings enumerating therefrom, on the basis of compromise/memorandum of settlement dated 21.7.2024 MANISHA 2025.05.23 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-44680 & 03 connected cases 3. In compliance of the aforesaid or from the concerned jurisdictional Court that the compromise between the parties is genuine and arrived at without any pressure or coercion from anyone. 4. In view of the compromise and the ratio of law laid down by the 44680-2024 3 & 03 connected cases Mr. Chanakya Batta, Advocate has filed memo of appearance on behalf of the respondent and has submitted that he has no objection in case the FIR(supra) is quashed on the basis of compromise (Supra). He is permitted to file Vakalatnama before the Registry of this Court within a week from today. In view of above, the parties are directed to appear before the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court concerned within one month from today to get their respective statements recorded regarding the compromise and af statements, the learned trial Court/Illaqa directed to send the same alongwith its report, regarding the genuineness of compromise, on or before the next date of hearing in the present petition, specifically with regard to the following facts:- 1. Number of persons arrayed as accused in the FIR; 2. Whether any accused is proclaimed offender; 3. Stage of the trial/proceedings. 4. Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary, and without any coercion or undue influence and 5. Total number of victims and their names. It is made clear that complainant/private respondent should also appear in person before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate concerned to get his statement recorded regarding compromise. To come up on 30.1.2025. The State counsel is also directed to verify the factum of compromise by the date fixed. A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for compliance. In compliance of the aforesaid order, a report has been received from the concerned jurisdictional Court that the compromise between the parties is genuine and arrived at without any pressure or coercion from In view of the compromise and the ratio of law laid down by the Mr. Chanakya Batta, Advocate has filed memo of appearance on behalf of the respondent and has submitted that he has no objection in case the FIR(supra) is quashed on the basis of compromise (Supra). He is permitted to file Vakalatnama before f this Court within a week from today. In view of above, the parties are directed to appear before the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court concerned within one month from today to get their respective statements recorded regarding the compromise and after recording their respective statements, the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate concerned is directed to send the same alongwith its report, regarding the genuineness of compromise, on or before the next date of hearing ically with regard to the following 1. Number of persons arrayed as accused in the FIR; 2. Whether any accused is proclaimed offender; 3. Stage of the trial/proceedings. 4. Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary, and without any or undue influence and 5. Total number of victims and their names. It is made clear that complainant/private respondent should also appear in person before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate concerned to get his statement recorded regarding To come up on 30.1.2025. The State counsel is also directed to verify the factum of A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for compliance.” der, a report has been received from the concerned jurisdictional Court that the compromise between the parties is genuine and arrived at without any pressure or coercion from In view of the compromise and the ratio of law laid down by the MANISHA 2025.05.23 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-44680 & 03 connected cases Hon’ble Supreme Court in and another, (2014) 6 SCC 46 Kaushalya (Mrs.) and others (1980) 1 SCC 63 Kulwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab 2007 (3) RCR are allowed and Jain Vs. Ramesh K dated 30.01.2004 as well as the subsequent summoning order dated 14.06.2024 passed Jagraon whereby the petitioners have been summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471 & 120 IPC and all consequential proceedings arising out qua the petitioner 5. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected cases. May 22, 2025 manisha (i) (ii) 44680-2024 4 & 03 connected cases ’ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 46, and Shakuntala Sawhney (Mrs) Vs. Kaushalya (Mrs.) and others (1980) 1 SCC 63 and Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab 2007 (3) RCR allowed and criminal complaint bearing complaint titled “Sanmati Vimal Jain Vs. Ramesh Kumar Jain & Others” bearing No. dated 30.01.2004 as well as the subsequent summoning order dated 14.06.2024 passed by the Court of learned Sub Divisional whereby the petitioners have been summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471 & 120 and all consequential proceedings arising out qua the petitioners. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected (HARPREET SINGH BRAR Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab Shakuntala Sawhney (Mrs) Vs. and Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, all petitions criminal complaint bearing complaint titled “Sanmati Vimal umar Jain & Others” bearing No.31/1 (COMI-34821-2013) dated 30.01.2004 as well as the subsequent summoning order dated Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, whereby the petitioners have been summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471 & 120-B of and all consequential proceedings arising out of the same are quashed, A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No MANISHA 2025.05.23 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment