[Cites 11, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Tirlochan Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 23 March, 2026
CRM-M-47065-2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
317
CRM-M-47065-2025
TIRLOCHAN SINGH AND OTHERS
....PETITIONERS
V/s
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
....RESPONDENTS
Date of decision: 23.03.2026
Date of Uploading: 23.03.2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present: Mr. N.S. Dandiwal, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Gaurav Gurcharan S. Rai, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Davender Singh, Advocate for
Mr. Kuldeep Singh Saini, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4.
*****
SUMEET GOEL, J. ORAL
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS,
2023 for quashing of FIR No.187 dated 31.07.2024 under Sections 420, 447,
467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station Mataur, District
SAS Nagar Mohali, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on
the basis of compromise dated 02.10.2024 (Annexure P-2), which is stated
to have been effected between the parties.
2. On 27.08.2025, the following order was passed:
"Prayer in the present petition under Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for quashing of
FIR No.187 dated 31.07.2024 under Sections 420, 447, 467,
468, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered
at Police Station Mataur, District SAS Nagar Mohali along
with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis
of compromise dated 02.10.2024 (Annexure P-2).
1 of 5
2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute in the
main case i.e. in FIR No.187 dated 31.07.2024 impugned
herein, has been resolved amicably and parties have agreed to
get the proceedings quashed.
3. Notice of motion.
4. Mr. Saurav Verma, Addl. A.G. Punjab accepts notice on
behalf of respondent No.1-State and prays for some time to file
the reply/status report.
5. Mr. Kuldeep Singh Saini, Advocate enters appearance on
behalf of respondent No.2 and he does not dispute the fact that
the matter has been compromised between the parties.
6. The affected parties are directed to appear before the
learned Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their
respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise
on or before 24.09.2025. Thereupon, the concerned Court shall
submit a detailed report, containing the information on the
following points, along with copies of the statements to this
Court, on or before the adjourned date:-
I. Total number of persons found involved as accused in the
dispute/FIR;
II. Number of complainant/victim(s);
III. Whether all the accused and complainant / victims are party
to compromise & signed the same;
IV. In case, any affected person (accused or complainant) is left
out or not arrayed as party in the quashing petition before High
Court, detail whereof; OR His/her statement is still to be
recorded, in compliance to the direction of this Court, details of
such person;
V. Whether any accused has been declared as a proclaimed
offender/person or any such proceedings against him/her have
been initiated or pending adjudication;
VI. Report of the Court whether compromise is genuine,
voluntary, and without any coercion or undue influence;
VII. Any other aspect relevant to the present case.
7. To come up on 27.10.2025, awaiting report.
8. Reply by the respondent-State, if any, be filed on or before
the next date of hearing."
3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 23.01.2026 from
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, SAS Nagar Mohali has been received,
which is taken on record. As per the report, the Trial Court has recorded as
follows:-
"i. As per earlier statements of complainant Jai Singh and
accused Tirlochan Singh son of Manjit Singh, Rajinder Singh
son of Karnail Singh, Pawan Kumar Verma son of Ganesh
2 of 5
Dass Verma and statements of victims Manjit Kaur wife of
Tirlochan Singh and Jagjit Singh son of Tirlochan Singh,
recorded in compliance of order dated 09.12.2025, compromise
has been effected between complainant Jai Singh, victims
Manjit Kaur and Jagjit Singh, on one hand and accused
Tirlochan Singh, Rajinder Singh, Pawan Kumar Verma, on the
other hand. Above compromise is genuine, voluntary, out of
free will of parties and without any coercion or undue
influence. All the accused, involved in present case and all the
complainant and victims of present FIR are party to above
compromise and have suffered their statement, before this court
regarding the same."
4. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 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 of
September, 2021). The proposition of law that emerges from the aforesaid
decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court is :
3 of 5
(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.
(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 chargesheet 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
4 of 5
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., 1973. 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.187 dated 31.07.2024
under Sections 420, 447, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station
Mataur, District SAS Nagar Mohali, and all consequential proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 02.10.2024 (Annexure P-2), are,
hereby, quashed.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE
23.03.2026
jatin
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
5 of 5
