234 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-11217-2026 Date of Decision: 10.07.2026 VIKRAM SINGH AND ANOTHER ...Petitioners Vs. STATE OF PUNAB AND ANOTHER ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: None for the petitioners. Mr. Gurpartap Singh, AAG Punjab. VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashing of FIR No. 101 dated 08.09.2024, registered under Sections 420 and 406 of the IPC at Police Station Moonak, District Sangrur, Punjab, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise dated 05.01.2026 (Annexure P-4) entered into between the parties. 2. Reply by way of affidavit of DSP, Sub Division, Moonak on behalf of respondent/State has been filed in Court today, which is taken on record, copy of the same has been supplied to the counsel opposite. 3. On the last date of hearing, i.e., 19.03.2026, parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise and to submit report to that effect before this Court. 4. Report dated 21.04.2026 has since been received from Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Moonak, duly forwarded by learned District and Sessions Judge, Sangrur, in pursuance of the directions of this Court. KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.10 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh -2- 5. A perusal of the report received from the learned trial Court reveals that although the complainant, Jatinderpal Singh, and accused- petitioner Vikram Singh appeared before the Court and got their statements recorded in support of the compromise, but, accused-petitioner No.2-Mukhtiar Singh failed to appear for recording of his statement. Consequently, the compromise has not been verified qua all the petitioners, and this Court is unable to satisfy itself regarding its genuineness and voluntariness in respect of all the parties seeking quashing of the FIR. 6. Furthermore, when the present petition was taken up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the petitioners. No explanation has been furnished either for the non-appearance of accused-petitioner No.2-Mukhtiar Singh before the learned trial Court for verification of the compromise or for the absence of counsel before this Court. 7. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is not inclined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of the FIR on the basis of the alleged compromise. 8. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) JUDGE 10.07.2026 kv Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.10 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh