Hari Singh And Others v. State Of Punjab And Another

CRM-M-64024 of 2024 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-64024 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.07.2025 Hari Singh and Others ....PETITIONERS

VERSUS

State of Punjab and Another ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL

Present:

Ms. Amardeep Singh Mann, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Sahil Gambhir, Advocate for Mr. Gursimran Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

By way of this petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, the petitioners are seeking quashing of complaint no.COMI/36/2017 dated 26.05.2017 under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC Police Station City Budhlada before the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Budhlada, District Mansa (Annexure P-1) and judgment of conviction dated 30.03.2024 (CNR No. PBMN01000449-2017) titled as "Paramjit Kaur Versus Hari Singh etc." passed by the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate , Budhlada (Annexure P-2) and all proceedings emanating thereof in view of compromise (Annexure P-3) arrived at between the parties. 2.

Vide order dated 19.12.2024 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned Appellate Court by way of moving an

CRM-M-64024 of 2024 (O&M) -2application for getting their statements recorded qua the factum of compromise and the Court concerned was further directed to get the statements of the parties recorded qua the compromise so arrived at between them and further to submit its report on the basis of statements so recorded. 3.

Report has since been received from learned District & Sessions Judge, Mansa, in pursuance of the directions of this Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report, 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 complainant has also made statement to the effect that he would have no objection if the aforesaid complaing qua the accused-petitioners is quashed.

4.

The Appellate Court has annexed a copy of the statements of the respondent-party so recorded, alongwith its report. 5.

Learned State counsel also submits that there is no accused person other than the petitioners, and respondent No.2 is the only aggrieved person in the complaint in question.

6.

In view of the report of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Mansa 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 and complaint no.COMI/36/2017 dated 26.05.2017 under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC Police Station City Budhlada before the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Budhlada, District Mansa (Annexure P-1) is quashed and judgment of conviction dated 30.03.2024 (CNR No.

CRM-M-64024 of 2024 (O&M) -3PBMN01000449-2017) titled as "Paramjit Kaur Versus Hari Singh etc." passed by the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate , Budhlada (Annexure P-2) and all proceedings emanating thereof are set aside, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-3).

7.

Needless to say that the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. (H.S. GREWAL) 30.07.2025 JUDGE Whether speaking/ reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No