Punjab-Haryana High Court
Labhu Alias Lattu And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 13 November, 2025
1
CRM-
CRM-M-57305-
57305-2025
215 (2nd case)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-
CRM-M-57305-
57305-2025
Date of decision: November 13, 2025
Labhu @ Lattu and others
....Petitioners
Petitioners
versus
State of Punjab and others
....Respondentss
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present:-
Present: Mr. Chandan Singh Rana, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG Punjab.
Ms. Komal Sohi, Advocate for
Mr. Vikrant Pujara, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5.
*****
SUMEET GOEL,
GOEL, J. (ORAL)
The present petition has been fil
filed under Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for quashing
of FIR No.134
134 dated 18.07.2025 (Annexure P
P-1), under Sections 115(2),
118(1), 126(2), 351(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for
short 'BNS'),
'BNS') registered at Police
olice Station Salem Tabri, District Police
Commissionerate, Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of compromise/affidavit
compromise/affidavit dated 29.09.2025 (Annexure
P-2), which is stated to have been effected between the parties.
2. On 14.10.2025, the following order was passed:
"The petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of
FIR (Annexure P-1)
1) and all consequential proceedings emanating
1 of 6
CRM-
CRM-M-57305-
57305-2025
therefrom on the basis of a compromise having been effected between the
parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all
concerned are parties to the
present petition in terms of the dicta of the Division Bench judgment of
this Court passed in 'Rakesh Das Vs. State of Haryana and another',
2024:PHHC;147654--DB.
Neutral Citation: 2024:PHHC;147654
Notice of motion.
At this stage, Mr. Gurpartap S. Bhullar, AAG, Punjab has put in
appearance on behalf of respondent No.1-State of Punjab and accepts
notice.
Mr. Vikrant Pujara, Advocate has filed memorandum of
appearance for respondent Nos.2 to 5. The same be taken on record.
The parties are directed to get their statements recorded qua the
factum of compromise in the following manner:
(i) The parties shall appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate
concerned on 18.10.2025 or any date thereafter as fixed by trial
Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording statements of the petitioner
as well as of the complainant qua the factum of compromise. As
and when any such appearance is made, the trial Court/Illaqa
Magistrate shall do the needful for recording the statements of the
parties qua the factum of the compromise. It shall be open to the
trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate to either record the statements of the
parties by physical process or by video conferencing as deemed
appropriate by the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.
(ii) In case the statement is to be recorded by way of video
conferencing, the parties concerned shall be duly identified
through video conferencing by their respective counsel, subject to
the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer.
(iii) The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate may also choose to get the
statements of the parties recorded through some Commissioner,
appointed by the Court who would be some Advocate having
sufficient standing at the Bar. In case the statement is recorded
through some Commissioner, such Commissioner/Advocate shall
furnish an affidavit after recording statements to the effect that the
parties had appeared before him/her and he/she had recorded their
statements as per law and that the said parties had been duly
identified by their respective counsel. This shall be subject to
satisfaction of trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.
After recording the statements of all the affected parties in either of
the aforesaid manner, the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall submit its
report on the basis of the statements so recorded as to whether all the
affected parties have entered into a compromise and as to whether the
compromise in question is found to be a valid compromise and has been
effected without there being any kind of influence or coercion.
The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall also report as regards the
following facts after seeking information from Investigating Officer,
concerned:
(i) Whether there is any other accused other than the petitioner,
arrayed in this petition?
(ii) Whether there is any other complainant or affected/ aggrieved
party other than the respondents, arrayed in the petition?
(iii) Whether any accused has been declared Proclaimed Offender?
The report be submitted before this Court before the next date of
hearing i.e. 13.11.2025.
The petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of ₹25,000/- as costs
with the Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Clerks' Association, Bank
details whereof reads thus:
2 of 6
CRM-
CRM-M-57305-
57305-2025
Account No. 65004775776;
IFSC Code: SBIN0050306;
Branch Code: 50306;
Bank: State Bank of India, High Court Branch, Chandigarh
Payment of costs and production of receipt thereof shall be a
condition precedent for recording of statements in the manner directed for
hereinabove.
To be heard alongwith CRM-M-56916-2025."
3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 01.11.2025 from
the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana has been received, which is taken
on record. As per said report, the Trial Court has recorded as follows:
"2. It is further respectfully submitted that complainant
Shankar @ Shankar Giri as well as other victims namely Pammi, Buta Giri
and Shiva minor through his father Buta Giri have got their statement
recorded that FIR No.134 of 18.07.2025, under Sections 115 (2), 118(1),
126(2), 351(2), 3 (5) BNS, PS Salem Tabri, Ludhiana, was registered
against the accused persons namely Labhu @Lattu, Sunil and Veena on
the basis of statement of complainant. Now with the intervention of
respectables, they have compromised the matter with the above mentioned
accused persons vide compromise deed Ex. Cl without any coercion or
undue influence and out of their free will. They have no objection if the
above said FIR and the consequential proceedings are quashed as a whole
against the above mentioned accused in view of the compromise. Copies
of identity proofs of complainant and victims have been placed on record
as Ex. C2 to Ex. C4.
3. Accused persons namely Labhu @Lattu, Sunil and Veena
have also got their joint statement recorded that present FIR was registered
against them on the basis of statement of complainant Shankar and now
with the intervention of respectables, they have compromised the matter
with each other without any coercion or undue influence and out of their
free will. The above said FIR along with all the subsequent proceedings
may be quashed against them in view of the compromise Ex. C1. They
placed on record Photo copies of their self attested Aadhar Cards as Ex.
C6 to Ex. C7. Further accused persons/ petitioners have deposited a sum
of Rs.25,000/- as costs with the Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Clerks
Association in Account No. 65004775776 and receipt of said payment has
also been placed on record by them.
4. ASI Harmesh Lal No. 1330/LDH, posted at police Station
Salem Tabri, Ludhiana got recorded his statement that FIR No.134 dated
18.07.2025 U/s 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) BNS, Police Station
Salem Tabri, Ludhiana, was registered on the statement of
complainant/victim Shankar @ Shankar Giri against three accused persons
namely Labhu @Lattu, Sunil and Veena. Complainant alongwith Pammi,
Buta Giri and Shiva (minor through his father Buta Giri) (respondents no.2
to 5) were the victims in this case.
There are three accused persons in the present case and no other
accused other than the petitioners. There is no other complainant or
affected/aggrieved party other than the respondents. None of the accused
has ever been declared as Proclaimed offender in the present case.
5. It is further humbly submitted that:-
3 of 6
CRM-
CRM-M-57305-
57305-2025
(1) There are only three accused persons namely Labhu @Lattu, Sunil
and Veena in the aforesaid FIR and there is no other accused other
than the petitioners arrayed in this petition.
(2) There is no other complainant or affected/aggrieved party other
than the respondents arrayed in this petition.
(3) No accused has ever been declared as Proclaimed Offender.
This is for your kind information, please."
4. Learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 5 admits the fact of
parties having compromised, and states that he has no objection in case the
FIR and all proceedings subsequent thereto against the petitioners are
quashed.
5. Similarly, learned State counsel has stated no objection in case
the FIR is quashed based upon the compromise (Annexure P-2).
6. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully
gone through the records of the case.
7. This Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court has repeatedly dealt
with the issue of exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code to
quash proceeding in non-compoundable offences in the cases of Gian Singh
vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303, Kulwinder Singh &
others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and
Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R.
(Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of 2012 decided on 29th
29th of
September, 2021). The proposition of law that emerges from the aforesaid
decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court is:
(a) Power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. vested with this Court is much wider and is
unaffected by Section 320 of the Code.
(b) However, wider the power greater the caution.
(c) The underlining principle while exercising such power is that it can
be invoked to quash the proceedings recognizing compromise
between the parties in the matters which are overwhelmingly and
predominantly of civil character like commercial transactions or
arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes.
4 of 6
CRM-
CRM-M-57305-
57305-2025
(d) The said power is not to be exercised in the prosecutions involving
heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like
murder, rape, dacoity etc. as such offences are not private in nature
and have a serious impact on society.
(e) Section 482 Cr.P.C. casts duty upon the High Court to advance
interest of justice as well. It is in recognition of this duty casted
upon the High Court, that Apex Court held that the High Court
would not refuse to quash FIR under Section 307 merely because
FIR finds mention thereof. High Court can assess nature of injuries
sustained, whether such injuries inflicted on vital/delicate parts of
the body/nature of weapons used etc.
(f) Such exercise at the hands of High Court would be permissible
only after the evidence is collected after investigation and
charge-sheet is filed/charges framed during the trial. Such exercise
cannot be carried out while the matter is still under
investigation.
(g) While quashing FIR in non-compoundable offences even which
are of private in nature, High Court is required to consider
antecedents of the accused, conduct of the accused and whether he
was absconding or whether he has managed the complainant to
enter into a compromise.
The statutory provision of Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 is same
as the statutory provision of Section 482 of Cr. P.C. Therefore, the above
said principles of law would apply to a petition under Section 528 of BNSS,
2023 as well.
8. Thus, keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise
jurisdiction vested u/s 528 of BNSS, 2023 to quash the FIR as:
(i) Putting a quietus to the proceedings will bring peace and
tranquility amongst parties & will accordingly further the cause of
substantial justice;
(ii) The offences alleged are primarily of private nature;
(iii) The parties have compromised;
(iv) As per the report received the compromise is said to be voluntary
in its nature;
(v) Complainant/victim is reported to have entered into compromise
on his own volition.
9. Consequently, the petition is allowed. FIR No.134 dated
18.07.2025 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 351(2) &
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS'), registered at
Police Station Salem Tabri, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana and
5 of 6
CRM-
CRM-M-57305-
57305-2025
all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of
compromise/affidavit dated 29.09.2025 (Annexure P-2), are, hereby,
quashed qua the petitioners.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(SUMEET GOEL)
GOEL)
JUDGE
November 13, 2025
mahavir
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
6 of 6
