Surinder Kumar Alias Shindu And Others v. State Of Punjab And Others
[298]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34389-2025 Decided on : 03.09.2025 Surinder Kumar @ Shindu and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present:
Ms. Aayushi, Advocate for Mr. Umesh Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Aryan Sharma, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 & 3. SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1.
Instant petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNS, 2023 seeking quashing of the below detailed First Information Report (FIR), and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise dated 21.04.2025 (P-2), effected between the parties. DETAILS OF CRIMINAL CASE:- FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station 22.03.2025
Chheharta, Amritsar 2.
Vide order dated 04.07.2025, the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate/Area Magistrate, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise.
CRM-M-34389-2025 -23.
Report dated 08.08.2025 has since been received from learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar, 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 respondents have also made statement to the effect that they would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioners is quashed. 4.
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 Five accused 2.
Number of complainant/victim(s) Two victims/complainants 3.
Whether all the accused and complainant / victims are party to compromise & signed the same Yes 4.
In case, any affected person(accused or complainant) is left out or not 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 No complainant/accused has been left out in the petition and all have been arrayed as party in the petition.
Whether any accused has been declared as a proclaimed offender/person or any such proceedings against him/her have been initiated or pending adjudication No Report of the Court whether compromise is genuine, voluntary, and without any coercion or undue influence Yes Any other aspect relevant to the present case. As per statement of Investigating Officer complainant alleged that 10-15 unidentified persons were also involved in the alleged occurrence but their names could not be provided by the complainant and accordingly Investigating Agency could not trace those persons.
5.
Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioners and the private respondents are the only aggrieved person in the FIR in question. 6.
In view of the report of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, 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 of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below.
CRM-M-34389-2025 -48.
Petition stands disposed of.
03.09.2025 (SANJAY VASHISTH) 'R. Sharma'
JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable:
YES/NO