The trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties in original v. In case, any affected
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 528
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 61(2), 316(4), 318(4), 336(2), 338, 340(2), 341(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Report has since been received from learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, SAS Nagar (Mohali), in pursuance to the directions of this Court wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report(s) compromise has indeed…
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Diwan S. Adlakha, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Jasdeep Singh, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Rishab Tewari, Advocate, for respondent No.2/complainant. SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
Instant petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, seeking quashing of the below detailed First Information Report (FIR), and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise dated 14.05.2026 (Annexure P-3), effected between the parties. DETAILS OF CRIMINAL CASE:- FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station 37
18.02.2021 408, 420, 465, 467, 471, 473, 120-B of IPC [corresponding sections 316(4), 318(4), 336(2), 338, 340(2), 341(2), 61(2) of BNS] Mataur, SAS Nagar (Mohali) CRM-M-28119-2026 (O&M) 2 and section 66-D of IT Act
Vide order dated 18.05.2026, the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise.
Report has since been received from learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, SAS Nagar (Mohali), in pursuance to the directions of this Court wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report(s) compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the private respondent has also made statement to the effect that he would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioners is quashed.
The trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties in original, along with its report. The relevant part of the said report is reproduced herebelow: Sr. No. Description
1. Total number of persons found involved as accused in the dispute/FIR Four accused (Initially, there were total five accused. However, Davinder Kaur died later on)
2. Number of complainant/victim(s)
3. Whether all the accused and complainant / victims are party to compromise & signed the same
4. In case, any affected person(accused or complainant) is left out or not One victim/complainant Yes No complainant/accused has been left out in the petition and all have been arrayed as party in the petition. CRM-M-28119-2026 (O&M) 3 arrayed as party in the quashing petition before High Court, detail whereas; Or His/her statement is till to be recorded, in compliance to the direction of this Court, details of such person
Whether any accused has No been declared as a proclaimed offender/person or any such proceedings against him/her have been initiated or pending adjudication
Report of the Court whether compromise is genuine, voluntary, and without any coercion or undue influence
Any other aspect relevant to the present case. Yes As per the statement of the IO, present FIR was registered under sections 408, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 473, 483, 120-B of IPC and section 66-D of IT Act. However, petitioners have not filed the present quashing petition under section 483 of IPC.
5. Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioners and the private respondent is the only aggrieved person in the FIR in question.
6. In view of the report of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, SAS Nagar (Mohali), and the principles laid down by Hon’ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed.
7. Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms CRM-M-28119-2026 (O&M) 4 of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. Petition stands disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
29.05.2026 Lavisha (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO YES/NO Whether Reportable:
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 483; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 61(2), 316(4), 318(4), 336(2), 338, 340(2), 341(2).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 29 May 2026. The bench was SANJAY VASHISTH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.