Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SUMEET GOEL, J
GURDEV SINGH @ DEBI & ORS. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER – Respondent
CRM-M-13395-2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Mr. Divyam Verma, Advocate for Mr. B.S. Bhall
For the Respondents:Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. AG, Punjab, Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2
Court has jurisdiction to quash FIR under compromise in non-compoundable offences of a civil nature, recognizing that genuine compromises can further substantial justice.
Headnote:(A) Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 - Quashing of FIR - Compromise between parties - FIR under Sections 447, 427, 379, 148, 149 of IPC quashed based on compromise dated 28.01.2025 - Compromise deemed genuine, voluntary, and without coercion - Injuries were primarily private in nature. (Paras 1-9)
(B) Jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Scope - High Court's power to quash non-compoundable offences when compromise is genuine is recognized, provided such offences are of a civil character or primarily private - Offences like murder or rape remain non-compoundable due to their impact on society. (Para 7)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No.103 based on a compromise.
Findings of Court:
The FIR was quashed as the compromise was genuine and voluntary.
Issues: Whether the compromise was genuine and whether the FIR could be quashed based on that.
Ratio Decidendi: The High Court may quash FIRs in certain non-compoundable offences if the proceedings are of a predominantly civil nature and the compromise is voluntary.
Result: FIR and consequential proceedings quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing of petition for quashing fir based on compromise. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. trial court's report on compromise and innocence of accused. (Para 3) |
| 3. admission of compromise by state and respondent counsel. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. court's jurisdiction and applicable principles for fir quash. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. decision to quash the fir due to compromise. (Para 8 , 9) |
SUMEET GOEL , J .
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS , 2023 for quashing of FIR No.103 dated 29.6.2019 under Sections 447 , 427, 379, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code , 1860, registered at Police Station Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 28.01.2025 (Annexure P-2), which is stated to have been effected between the parties.
2. On 12.03.2025, the following order was passed:
“This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S for quashing of FIR No. 103, dated 29.06.2019, registered under Sections 447 ,427,379,148,149 of IPC, Police Station Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 28.01.2025 (Annexure P-2).
Notice of motion for 01.05.2025.
On asking of the Court, Mr. M.S. Bajwa, DAG, Punjab, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1 and Mr. Mandeep Singh Kanwar, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2, by filing his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.
The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise within a period of two weeks. The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court is directed to submit a report on or before the next date of hearing containing the following information:-
1. Total number and names of persons arrayed as accused.
2. Whether the present petition has been filed by all the accused?
3. Whether any accused is proclaimed offender?
4. Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence?
5. Whether the accused persons are involved in any other FIR or not? (mention complete details of FIR, if involved)
6. The trial Court is also directed to record the statement of the Investigating Officer as to how many victims/complainants are there in the FIR.
7. Whether all the victims/injured/complainants have been impleaded as respondents in the present petition?”
3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 25.09.2025 from Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga has been received, which is taken on record. As per the report, the Trial Court has recorded as follows:-
“1. From the record as well as from the statement of Retired ASI Harpal Singh, it is evident that total six persons namely Debi Singh @ Gurdev Singh, Nirijart Singh, Peeta Singh @ Jaspreet Singh @ Gurpreet Singh, Mintu Singh @ Krishan Singh, Ranjeet... Singh and Jassa Singh @ Jaspreet Singh were arrayed as accused in the present FIR. However, during inquiry, accused namely Ranjeet Singh and Jassa Singh @ Jasspreet Singh were declared as innocent, and challan was present agaisnt only four accused persons namely Debi Singh @ Gurdev Singh. Nirijan Singh, Peeta Singh @ Jaspreet Singh @ Gurpreet Singh, Mintų Singh @ Krishan Singh.
2. From the record as well as from the statement of Retired ASI Harpal Singh, it is evident that all the accused persons Debi Singh @ Gurdev Singh, Nirijan Singh, Peeta Singh @ Jaspreet Singh @ Gurpreet Singh, Mintu Singh @ Krishan Singh, Ranjeet Singh and Jassa Singh @ Jaspreet Singh have filed thepetition before Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana and only four accused, persons namely Debi Singh @ Gurdev Singh, Nirijan Singh, Peeta Singh @ Jaspreet Singh @
Gurpreet Singh, Mintu Singh @ Krishan Singh have appeared and have made statements regarding compromise. It is pertinent to mention here that Ranjeet Singh and Jassa Singh @
Jaspreet Singh have not appeared in the Court.
3. From the statements of the parties as well as st
