Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 90597 (PNJ)

SURINDER SINGH ALIAS SAWINDER SINGH ALIAS SAMMI v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CRM-M/48163/2024 · 2025-09-09

Vinod S Bhardwaj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-48163-2024 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 267 CRM-M-48163-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.09.2025. SURINDER SINGH @ SAWINDER SINGH @ SAMMI ...Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Manish Kansra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Vivek Singla, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3. VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for seeking quashing of FIR bearing No.74 dated 04.08.2020, under Sections 323, 325, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Ramdas, District Amritsar Rural along with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 23.01.2023. Undisputedly, the compromise has been arrived at in a case RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2025.09.11 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-48163-2024 (O&M) -2- where two of the accused persons are absconding and have been declared as proclaimed persons. It is also noticed that the matter was posted by this Court for getting the statements of the parties recorded before the concerned Illaqa Magistrate regarding the compromise, however, as per report received, the parties have not appeared before the Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in the matter of Rakesh Das Vs. State of Haryana and another, CRM-M- 48043-2023, decided on 12.11.2024 along with other matters, wherein it has been laid down that partial quashing of the FIR is not permissible, the present petition cannot be entertained at this stage. On being confronted that petition seeking quashing of the FIR partially would not be maintainable in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the matter of Rakesh Das (supra), counsel for the petitioner seeks withdrawal of the present petition at this stage. Ordered accordingly. September 09, 2025. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2025.09.11 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document