340 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 15.10.2025 Mihtu and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Prabhdeep Singh Bhandari, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Sahil Chawdhary, A.A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Prabhpreet Bedi, Advocate for Mr. Gurinder Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.

RAJESH BHARDWAJ.J (Oral)

1. Instant petition has been filed seeking quashing of FIR No.31 dated 12.04.2024, under Sections 324, 341, 34 of IPC and lateron Section 201 of IPC was added, registered at Police Station Dera Baba Nanak, Police District Batala and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise deed dated 04.06.2025 (Annexure P-2).

2. FIR in question was got registered by complainant-respondent No.2 and the investigation commenced thereon. However, with the intervention of respectables, finally the parties arrived at settlement and they resolved their inter se dispute, which is apparent from Compromise Deed, annexed as Annexure P-2. On the basis of the compromise, petitioners are invoking the inherent power of this Court by praying that continuation of these proceedings would be a futile exercise and an abuse of process of the Court and thus, the FIR in question and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom may be quashed in the interest of justice.

3. This Court vide order dated 10.07.2025 directed the parties to appear before the Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements, as contended before the Court, and the Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate was also directed to send its report.

4. In pursuance to the same, learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Batala has sent the report dated 08.08.2025 to this Court. With the report, he has also annexed original statement of respondent No.2, namely, Sucha Masih (complainant) and joint statement of petitioners, namely, Mihtu, Hero and Mintu Masih @ Kharauda recorded on 21.07.2025 and statement of SI Raghbir Singh recorded on 07.08.2025. On the basis of the statements, learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Batala has concluded in the report that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine/correct, voluntary, without any coercion or undue influence and same is not the result of any fraud or misrepresentation and is the result of free will of the parties. It has been mentioned therein that the petitioners were not declared as proclaimed offenders.

5. Status report by way of affidavit of Mr. Joga Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Dera Baba Nanak, Police District Batala has been filed on behalf of respondent-State, in the Court today, same is taken on record.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and the report sent by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Batala.

7. A bare perusal of statutory provision of the 528 of B.N.S.S. would show that the High Court may make such orders, as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Section 359 B.N.S.S.

is equally relevant for consideration, which prescribes the procedure for compounding of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

8. Keeping in view the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, the continuation of criminal prosecution would be a futile exercise. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a number of cases including Narinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another, 2014 (6) SCC 466; B.S.Joshi and others vs State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 Supreme Court Cases 675 followed by this Court in Full Bench case of Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR 1052 have dealt with the proposition involved in the present case and settled the law.

9. Thereafter, Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs State of Punj