CRM-M-19371- 331 IN TH Gurdev Singh State of Punjab CORAM : HON Present: Mr Mr. K Mr. Rajesh Bhardwa 1. Insta dated 10.07.202 (Corresponding S Taran, District Ta basis of comprom 2. The the investigation respectables, fina dispute, which is petitioners are pr exercise and an a the subsequent p justice. -2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR -.- CRM Date VERSUS and Others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH Mr. Sarbjit Singh, Advocate for the p Mr. Kuljinder Dhindsa, AAG Punjab Mr. Gurjinder Singh Thind, Advocat -.- ardwaj, J. (ORAL) Instant petition has been filed prayi 7.2023 registered under Sections ding Sections 132, 221, 324(4), 351 of trict Tarn Taran and subsequent proc promise deed dated 17.06.2025, Ann The FIR in question was lodged by c igation commenced thereon. Howe s, finally the parties arrived at settleme ch is apparent from Annexure P-2. On are praying that continuation of thes d an abuse of process of the Court and uent proceedings arising therefrom m -1- UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH CRM-M-19371-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 07.05.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondents JESH BHARDWAJ r the petitioner. Punjab. dvocate for respondents No.2 and 3. praying for quashing of FIR No.21 tions 353, 186, 427 and 506 IP of BNS) at Police Station City Tar t proceedings arising therefrom on th , Annexure P-2. ed by complainant-respondent No.2 an However, with the intervention o ttlement and they resolved their inter s . On the basis of the compromise, th of these proceedings would be a futi urt and thus, the FIR in question and a rom may be quashed in the interest o 219, 06 IPC ity Tarn on the o.2 and tion of inter se ise, the a futile and all terest of TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.12 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-19371- 3. This before the trial Co before the Court, report. 4. In p Taran has sent photocopy of the Rupinder Singh @ and statement of statements, learn report that the co mentioned in the present petitioner been declared pro 5. Lear compromised the against the petiti accepted. 6. Lear the present FIR is 7. Statu Superintendent o Court is taken on 8. I hav the report sent by -2026 (O&M) This Court vide order dated 09.04.2 trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for record Court, and the trial Court/Illaqa Magis In pursuance to the same, learned sent report dated 05.05.2026. Wit of the statements of respondents No.2 ingh @ Rahul and petitioner, namely ent of ASI Gurbhej Singh dated learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, T the compromise is genuine, voluntaril in the report that there are only one itioner. It is further mentioned in the r ed proclaimed offender nor he is invol Learned counsel for the petitioner h ed the matter amicably and have de petitioners quashed and as such the Learned counsel for respondent No.2 FIR is quashed. Status report by way of affidavit dent of Police, Sub-Division Tarn Ta en on record. I have heard learned counsel for th ent by learned Chief Judicial Magistra -2- 9.04.2026 directed the parties to appe recording their statements, as contende Magistrate was also directed to send i ned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tar . With the report, she has annexe No.2 and 3, namely, Jagjit Singh an amely, Gurdev Singh dated 23.04.202 ated 23.04.2025. On the basis of th trate, Tarn Taran has concluded in i untarily and out of free will. It has bee accused in the present case i.e. th n the report that neither the accused involved any other case. oner has submitted that the parties hav ave decided to get the FIR registere ch the present petition is liable to b t No.2 has also pleaded no objection, idavit of Sukhbir Singh, PPS, Depu arn Taran District Tarn Taran filed for the parties, perused the record an agistrate, Tarn Taran. appear ntended send its te, Tarn annexed ngh and 04.2026 of the d in its as been i.e. the sed has ies have gistered le to be ction, if Deputy filed in ord and TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.12 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-19371- 9. A ba Suraksha Sanhita may be necessary the process of an Bhartiya Nagrik which prescribes 2023. 10. Keep fact that both the criminal prosecut number of cases and another, 201 another (2003) 4 case of Kulwind RCR 1052 have d the law. 11. Ther and another (201 the earlier law se Haryana vs Bha as under:- “61. summ proce is dis comp -2026 (O&M) A bare perusal of statutory provisio anhita, 2023 would show that the High essary to give effect to any order unde of any Court or otherwise to secure agrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is eq cribes the procedure for compounding Keeping in view the nature of offen th the parties have amicably settled cution would be a futile exercise. cases including Narinder Singh and er, 2014 (6) SCC 466, B.S.Joshi and 003) 4 Supreme Court Cases 675 foll lwinder Singh and others Vs. State have dealt with the proposition involv Thereafter, Hon'ble Supreme Court i (2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 30 law settled by the Supreme Court for Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 33 “61. The position that emerges fro summarised thus: the power of the H proceeding or FIR or complaint in ex is distinct and different from the po compounding the offences under Se -3- ovisions of the 528 of Bhartiya Nagr e High Court may make such orders, a r under this Code or to prevent abuse o secure the ends of justice. Section 35 is equally relevant for consideratio unding of the offences under the BN f offences allegedly committed and th ettled their dispute, the continuation o rcise. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in h and others Versus State of Punja i and others vs State of Haryana an followed by this Court in Full Benc State of Punjab and another, 2007(3 involved in the present case and settle ourt in Gian Singh vs State of Punja ses 303 further dealt with the issue an urt for quashing of the FIR in State o CC 335. Para 61 of the judgment read es from the above discussion can b f the High Court in quashing a crimin nt in exercise of its inherent jurisdictio power given to a criminal court fo der Section 320 of the Code. Inhere Nagrik rders, as abuse of ion 359 eration, e BNS, and the ation of urt in a Punjab na and ll Bench 2007(3) d settled Punjab sue and State of eads can be criminal sdiction ourt for Inherent TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.12 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-19371- powe exerc to se any C comp have of ea exerc natur ment fittin offen natur comp offen the o capac proce overw differ offen partn matri wron resol may comp conv woul injus despi In ot unfai -2026 (O&M) power is of wide plenitude with no s exercised in accord with the guidelin to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) t any Court. In what cases power to q complaint or F.I.R may be exercise have settled their dispute would depe of each case and no category can exercise of such power, the High Co nature and gravity of the crime. H mental depravity or offences like mu fittingly quashed even though the v offender have settled the dispute. S nature and have a serious impa compromise between the victim a offences under special statutes like the offences committed by public capacity, etc; cannot provide for a proceedings involving such offence overwhelmingly and pre-dominatin different footing for the purposes offences arising from commercia partnership or such like transaction matrimony relating to dowry, etc. o wrong is basically private or person resolved their entire dispute. In this may quash criminal proceedings compromise between the offender a conviction is remote and bleak and would put the accused to great oppr injustice would be caused to him b despite full and complete settlement In other words, the High Court mu unfair or contrary to the interest -4- h no statutory limitation but it has to b uideline engrafted in such power viz; ( r (ii) to prevent abuse of the process o er to quash the criminal proceeding o ercised where the offender and victi d depend on the facts and circumstance y can be prescribed. However, befo igh Court must have due regard to th ime. Heinous and serious offences o ike murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot b the victim or victim’s family and th pute. Such offences are not private impact on society. Similarly, an ctim and offender in relation to th s like Prevention of Corruption Act o ublic servants while working in th for any basis for quashing crimin nces. But the criminal cases havin minatingly civil flavour stand on rposes of quashing, particularly th mercial, financial, mercantile, civ actions or the offences arising out o etc. or the family disputes where th personal in nature and the parties hav n this category of cases, the High Cou ings if in its view, because of th nder and the victim, the possibility o k and continuation of the criminal cas t oppression and prejudice and extre him by not quashing the criminal cas ement and compromise with the victim urt must consider whether it would b terest of justice to continue with th as to be r viz; (i) ocess of eding or victim stances , before d to the nces of nnot be and the ivate in ly, any to the Act or in that criminal having on a rly the , civil, out of here the ies have h Court of the bility of nal case extreme nal case victim. ould be ith the TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.12 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-19371- crimi tanta comp secur an en the H crimi 12. Appl judgments and th into a compromis proceedings woul accepting the pra ends of justice, w Section 482 Cr.P.C 13. In th squarely falls wit hence, FIR No.21 506 IPC (Corresp City Tarn Taran, therefrom, are he Annexure P-2. 14. Need conditions of the below. Petition sta May 07, 2026 tripti Whether Whether -2026 (O&M) criminal proceeding or continuation tantamount to abuse of process compromise between the victim and secure the ends of justice, it is appro an end and if the answer to the above the High Court shall be well with criminal proceeding.” Applying the law settled by Hon'b and this High Court it is apparent th promise, in the nature of cases as pr s would be merely an abuse of process e prayer of the petitioners by quashin stice, which is primarily the object o Cr.P.C. In the facts and circumstances, this lls within the ambit and parameters s No.219, dated 10.07.2023 registered orresponding Sections 132, 221, 324( Taran, District Tarn Taran and all the are hereby quashed qua the petition Needless to say that the parties shal of the compromise and their statem tion stands allowed. ether speaking/non-speaking : Speakin ether reportable : Yes/N -5- ation of the criminal proceeding wou cess of law despite settlement an im and the wrongdoer and whether appropriate that criminal case is put above question(s) is in the affirmativ ll within its jurisdiction to quash th Hon'ble Supreme Court in plethora o rent that when the parties have entere as prescribed then continuation of th rocess of the Court and by allowing an uashing the FIR would be securing th bject of the legislature enacting und s, this Court finds that the case in han eters settled by judicial precedents an tered under Sections 353, 186, 427 an 1, 324(4), 351 of BNS) at Police Statio all the subsequent proceedings arisin etitioners, on the basis of compromis es shall remain bound by the terms an statements recorded before the Cou (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) JUDGE peaking Yes/No g would ent and ether to is put to rmative, ash the thora of entered n of the ing and ring the g under in hand ents and 427 and Station arising promise rms and e Court WAJ) TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.12 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document