Punjab-Haryana High Court
Nitin Kumar Alias Nitin Verma And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 30 April, 2026
CRM-M-15657-2026 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
144
CRM-M-15657-2026 (O&M)
NITIN KUMAR @ NITIN VERMA AND OTHERS
....PETITIONERS
V/s
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
....RESPONDENTS
Date of decision: 30.04.2026
Date of Uploading: 30.04.2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present: Mr. R.S. Chugh, Advocate for the petitioners
(Through VC).
Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Bhavesh Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No.2.
*****
SUMEET GOEL, J. ORAL
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS,
2023 for quashing of FIR No.29 dated 10.02.2026 under Sections 331(6),
115(2), 351(2), 191(3) & 190 of BNS, registered at Police Station Dakha,
Ludhiana (Rural) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the
basis of compromise dated 06.03.2026 (Annexure P-2), which is stated to
have been effected between the parties.
2. On 23.03.2026, the following order was passed:
“Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 528 of BNSS, is for
quashing of FIR No.29 dated 10.02.2026 under Sections
331(6), 115(2), 351(2), 191(3) and 190 of BNS (earlier Sections
444, 323, 506, 148, 149 of IPC), Police Station Dakha, DistrictJATIN
2026.04.30 16:04
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-15657-2026 (O&M) 2Ludhiana (Rural) along with all the subsequent proceedings
arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2).
Notice of motion.
Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, DAG, Punjab appears on behalf of
respondent-State. Hence service of notice upon the State is
hereby dispensed with.
Power of attorney on behalf of respondent No.2 has been filed.
The same be taken on record.
To verify the claim of the petitioners that the compromise has
been entered into voluntarily, and that it is genuine, it shall be
appropriate that a report from the learned Jurisdiction
Magistrate is obtained. Hence, the parties are directed to
appear before the learned Jurisdiction Magistrate (physicially
or virtually) on 09.04.2026, for getting their statements
recorded with regard to the compromise. The learned
Jurisdiction Magistrate shall submit a report on or before the
next date of hearing to this Court, specifying the followings:-
1. Number of accused arraigned in the FIR and how many have
appeared before it and have made statements and whether any
accused is absconding/P.O. in the case;
2. Name of the complainant and injured/aggrieved/victims and
whether all of them have appeared and made their statements
in support of the compromise;
3. Number of accused prosecuted by the police;
4. Stage of trial/proceedings;
5. If the compromise is genuine, voluntary and out of free will
of the parties.
In case, the learned Jurisdiction Magistrate is not available on
the given date, or there is a holiday, on the given date, the
statement would be recorded by the Duty Magistrate.
Accordingly, report of the concerned Court be awaited for
30.04.2026.
To be shown in the urgent list.”
JATIN
2026.04.30 16:04
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-15657-2026 (O&M) 3
3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 28.04.2026 from
Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana
has been received, which is taken on record. As per the report, the Trial
Court has recorded as follows:-
“(i) As per statement of ASI Baljit Singh, in the present case
there are five accused persons in the present case namely Nitin
Kumar @ Nitin Verma Abhay Bansal, Simranjeet Singh,
Bikramjit Singh @ Vicky and Ravinder Singh @Billa. All the
accused persons appeared and made their statements. Further,
as per statement of ASI Baljit Singh, none of the accused
declared proclaimed offender/person and no such proceedings
against them have been initiated or pending adjudication.
(ii) As per statement of ASI Baljit Singh, in the present case
there is only complainant namely Hardeep Singh Tatla @ Noni
in the present case and he appeared in the Court and recorded
his statement in support of the compromise.
(iii) As per statement of ASI Baljit Singh, all the five accused
persons namely Nitin Kumar @ Nitin Verma, Abhay Bansal,
Simranjeet Singh, Bikramjit Singh @ Vicky and Ravinder Singh
@ Billa were prosecuted by the Police.
(iv) Challan is yet to be presented in the present FIR.
(v) Considering the statements of the complainant as well as of
accused persons, the compromise seems to be genuine and
voluntary in nature and without any coercion or undue
influence.”
4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 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.
JATIN
2026.04.30 16:04
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-15657-2026 (O&M) 4
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 :
(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.
JATIN
2026.04.30 16:04
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-15657-2026 (O&M) 5
(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
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.
JATIN
2026.04.30 16:04
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-15657-2026 (O&M) 6
(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.29 dated 10.02.2026
under Sections 331(6), 115(2), 351(2), 191(3) & 190 of BNS, registered at Police
Station Dakha, Ludhiana (Rural) and all consequential proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 06.03.2026 (Annexure P-2), are,
hereby, quashed.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE
30.04.2026
jatin
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
JATIN
2026.04.30 16:04
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
[ad_1]
Source link
