The Hon'ble Full Bench of this Cou The v. is Court in case Kulwinder Singh vs State of Punjab njab and another
Case Details
CRM-M No.628 6286 of 2025 -1- IN THE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH(cid:1) CHANDIGARH 251 (cid:1) Sunny Dhall CRM-M Date of De M No.6286 of 2025 e of Decision:25.07.2025 ... Petitioner State of Punjab and another s(cid:1) ... Respondents Versus (cid:1) CORAM : HON
Legal Reasoning
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT AMIT KUMAR Mr. K.S. Brar, Advocate Present: Mr for the petitioner. for t Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab. Mr. cate Mr. Gurmandeep Singh, Advocate Mr. for respondent No.2. for r *** *** (cid:1) NAMIT KUMA UMAR, J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed b The ction filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of BNSS, 2 SS, 2023 for quashing of FIR No nder R No.319 dated 23.10.2021 under Sections 498-A, A, 406 IPC registered at Police St d all lice Station City Kapurthala and all consequential pr tial proceedings emanating therefrom mise refrom on the basis of compromise dated 21.01.2025 .2025 (Annexure P-2) executed betwe between the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the parties hav Lear FIR ies have stated that the present FIR may be quashed a ashed as the parties have amicably sett ly settled the dispute. 3. During the course of preliminary Duri was inary hearing, the trial Court was directed to record record the statements of all the concer o the concerned parties, with regard to the genuineness and ss and validity of the compromise by th e by this Court. 4. In compliance thereof, report date In c hief t dated 17.02.2025 from the Chief Judicial Magistra agistrate, Kapurthala has been receive t and eceived through learned District and Sessions Judge, udge, Kapurthala, with statements of t has nts of the parties, in which, it has PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.07.25 19:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.628 6286 of 2025 -2- been stated that that the compromise is genuine and ence e and there was no undue influence or coercion from from any side. 5. The Hon'ble Full Bench of this Cou The vs. is Court in case Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab njab and another, 2007(3) RCR ( n'ble CR (Criminal) 1052 and Hon'ble Division Bench ench of this Court in case Sube Sin of e Singh and another vs. State of Haryana and nd another, 2013(4) RCR (Cr (Criminal) 102 observed that that compounding of ing of offence can be allowed ev uring ed even after conviction, during proceedings of th s of the appeal against conviction pen n on pending in Sessions Court and in case of involving olving non-compoundable offence. 6. An identical question came to be An reme to be decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case Gia Gian Singh Versus State of Punja CR unjab and another, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 ) 543. Having interpreted the relevan as relevant provisions, it was ruled as under:- PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.07.25 19:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh from the above discussion can be be “57. 57. The position that emerges from a of the High Court in quashing a summarised thus: the power of th sum or complaint in exercise of its its crim criminal proceeding or FIR or and different from the power given ven inhe inherent jurisdiction is distinct and ion unding the offences under Section to a criminal court for compoundi to a wer is of wide plenitude with no no 320 320 of the Code. Inherent power to be exercised in accord with the the statu statutory limitation but it has to be of wer viz; (i) to secure the ends of guideline engrafted in such power guid f the process of any Court. In what hat justi justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the inal proceeding or complaint or or case cases power to quash the crimina led he offender and victim have settled F.I.R. may be exercised where the o F.I.R he facts and circumstances of each h their their dispute would depend on the fa escribed. However, before exercise ise case case and no category can be prescri ure must have due regard to the nature of such power, the High Court must of su tal ous and serious offences of mental and gravity of the crime. Heinous a and der, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be be depr depravity or offences like murder, the e victim or victim's family and the fittingly quashed even though the vi fittin in e. Such offences are not private in offender have settled the dispute. Su offen pact on society. Similarly, any ny natu nature and have serious impact the m and offender in relation to the compromise between the victim an com Act like Prevention of Corruption Act offences under special statutes like offen or quashing criminal proceedings ngs or t or the offences for any basis for q the criminal cases having ing ut involving such offences. But invo on inatingly civil flavour stand on overwhelmingly and pre-dominati over CRM-M No.628 6286 of 2025 -3- diffe different footing for the purposes offen offences arising from commercial partnership or such like transaction part matr matrimony relating to dowry etc. or wro wrong is basically private or perso have resolved their entire dispute. I have Cou Court may quash criminal proceed the the compromise between the offende conviction is remote and bleak and conv would put accused to great oppress wou inju injustice would be caused to him case despite full and complete settle case victim. In other words, the High C victi wou would be unfair or contrary to the with the criminal proceeding or with proceeding would tantamount to ab proc settl settlement and compromise betwee and whether to secure the ends of and criminal case is put to an end an crim ques question(s) is in affirmative, the Hi its jurisdiction to quash the criminal its ju ses of quashing, particularly the the rcial, financial, mercantile, civil, vil, t of tions or the offences arising out of c. or the family disputes where the e ersonnel in nature and the parties ties igh te. In this category of cases, High ceedings if in its view, because of of fender and victim, the possibility of of ase and continuation of criminal case me ression and prejudice and extreme him by not quashing the criminal nal the ettlement and compromise with the r it h Court must consider whether it the interest of justice to continue ue nal or continuation of the criminal ite to abuse of process of law despite tween the victim and wrongdoer oer hat s of justice, it is appropriate that ove d and if the answer to the above hin e High Court shall be well within inal proceeding.” 7. The same view has been reiterated The case iterated by the Apex Court in case Narinder Singh ngh and others Vs. State of Punja CR unjab and another, 2014(2) RCR ) 482. (Criminal) 482. 8. Having regard to the contentions of Hav rties ons of learned counsel for the parties and the fact that t that both the parties to the litigation mise gation have entered into compromise and on that basi t basis, the present petition under Se been der Section 528 of BNSS has been filed for quashin uashing the present FIR. The compro with ompromise has been arrived at with the intervention ntion of the respectables and family have amily members and the parties have decided to keep h keep harmony between them and to liv ence, d to live peacefully in future. Hence, it would be in the e in the interest of justice that parties a e the arties are allowed to compromise the matter. Moreove reover, learned counsel for the partie w of parties are ad idem that, in view of the settlement of ent of disputes between the parties, th es to ties, the present petition deserves to be accepted in th d in this context. PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.07.25 19:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.628 6286 of 2025 -4- 9. In view of above, the instant petiti In v ntly, t petition is allowed. Consequently, the impugned FI FIR No.319 dated 23.10.2021 un IPC 21 under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC registered at Poli at Police Station City Kapurthala and ings and all consequential proceedings emanating theref therefrom are hereby quashed, on the a the on the basis of compromise, qua the petitioner only. July 25, 2025 Pankaj* (NAMIT KUMAR) JUDGE ned Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.07.25 19:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh