Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23087 (PNJ)

KULWINDER SINGH AND ORS. v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

CRM-M/20927/2026 · 2026-05-26

Manisha Batra

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-20927-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 260 CRM-M-20927-2026 Date of Decision: 26.05.2026 KULWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS ......Petitioners Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Satbir Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.K. Panwar, Addl. A.G., Haryana for respondent No.1. Ms. Pushpa Bagoria, Advocate for respondent No.2. MANISHA BATRA J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (akin to Section 482 Cr.P.C, 1973) for quashing of FIR No.94 dated 07.07.2025 registered under Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 and under Sections 110/115/287/3(5)/351(2) (Section 117(2) added lateron) of BNS, 2023 (akin to Sections 308, 323, 285, 34, 506 (Section 325 added lateron) of IPC) at Police Station Rori, District Sirsa and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 08.04.2026 (Annexure P-2). 2 . This Court vide order dated 20.04.2026 had directed the parties to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded and the learned Magistrate was directed to send its report qua the genuineness of the compromise. POONAM RANI 2026.05.27 11:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-20927-2026 -2- 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, parties have appeared before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements so recorded, learned Judge has submitted report dated 16.05.2026 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 respondent No.2 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.94 dated 07.07.2025 registered under Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 and under Sections 110/115/287/3(5)/351(2) (Section 117(2) added lateron) of BNS, 2023 (akin to Sections 308, 323, 285, 34, 506 (Section 325 added lateron) of IPC) as well as all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 08.04.2026 (Annexure P-2) are quashed qua the petitioners. 26.05.2026 (MANISHA BATRA) P. Seth JUDGE Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No POONAM RANI 2026.05.27 11:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document