Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 98111 (PNJ)

ARMAN SINGH DHALIWAL AND OTHERS v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CRM-M/52281/2024 · 2025-07-23

Manisha Batra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-52281 of 2024 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 317 CRM-M-52281 of 2024 Date of Decision: 23.07.2025 Arman Singh Dhaliwal and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Angad Parmar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Vivek Sharma, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Kashish Thakur, Advocate and Mr. Vivek K. Thakur, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. ***** Manisha Batra, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short-‘BNSS’) for quashing of FIR No.275, dated 19.11.2023 under Sections 295, 341, 323, 427, 506, 148 and 149 of IPC, registered at Police Station Kotwali Kapurthala, District Kapurthala, and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2). 2. This Court vide order dated 04.12.2024 had directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the compromise. DINESH BANSAL 2025.07.24 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-52281 of 2024 -2- 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kapurthala and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Magistrate has submitted report dated 13.01.2025 to the effect that the compromise has been effected between the parties voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. 4. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 have not disputed the factum of compromise between the parties. 5. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR. 6. Following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and FIR No.275, dated 19.11.2023 under Sections 295, 341, 323, 427, 506, 148 and 149 of IPC, registered at Police Station Kotwali Kapurthala, District Kapurthala and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) are quashed qua the petitioners. (MANISHA BATRA) 23.07.2025 JUDGE D.Bansal Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/ No Whether Reportable : Yes/ No DINESH BANSAL 2025.07.24 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh