[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurpreet Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 27 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
277
CRM-M-11205-2026 (O&M)
Date of decision: 27.04.2026
Gurpreet Singh
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and Another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
*****
Present : Mr. Atinderpal Singh, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Ravneet Singh Lekhi, AAG Punjab
Mr. L.S. Virk, Advocate for respondent No.2
*****
AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)
1. The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.0053,
dated 05.09.2024, registered under Sections 333, 115(2) BNS, at Police Station
Tarsikka, Amritsar, Punjab, and all other consequential proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 11.02.2026 (Annexure P-2).
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the case
file.
3. This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated
26.02.2026, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate
for recording their statements with regard to the compromise.
4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 08.04.2026 has been
received from the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Baba Bakala
Sahib. As per which, one victim namely Arpitpreet Singh has not been made a
party-respondent, who is son of respondent No.1, however, as per the FIR, it
reveals that he was 9 years old and his mother has got her statements recorded,
CRM-M-11205-2026 (O&M) -2-
she being the complainant. A perusal of the said report reveals that statements of
the concerned persons have been recorded in the present case, who have stated
that the matter has been settled between them and they have no objection in case
the FIR in question is quashed. The compromise effected between them is
genuine, without any undue influence and coercion. It is stated in the report that
there is only one accused. Neither he has been declared as proclaimed offender
nor involved in any other FIR.
5. The Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs.
State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, held that High Court has
power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-
compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court is of the
view that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or
otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to
matrimonial disputes alone.
6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of
Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had observed that in order
to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent
power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a
compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said
judgment reads thus:-
"57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be
summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a
criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent
jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a
criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of
the Code.
Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but
it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such
power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of
the process of any Court. XXX---XXX"
CRM-M-11205-2026 (O&M) -3-
7. In view of the afore-referred judgments, perusing the report of the
trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner and the
complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a quietus to all
disputes between the parties and it is in the interest of both sides to bury the
hatchet and lead a peaceful life. Thus, no useful purpose would be served in
continuing the proceedings and in order to secure the ends of justice, the
criminal proceedings in the present case deserve to be quashed.
8. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.0053, dated
05.09.2024, registered under Sections 333, 115(2) BNS, at Police Station
Tarsikka, Amritsar, Punjab, and all other consequential proceedings arising
therefrom are quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of the compromise dated
11.02.2026.
(AMAN CHAUDHARY)
JUDGE
27.04.2026
M.Kamra
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No
Whether reportable : Yes / No
