Allowed¶33

Sohan Lal v. State of Haryana and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC1 May 2025CRM-M/17095/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRM-M-17095-2025, Punjab & Haryana High Court, Sandeep Moudgil J, decided 01.05.2025. Quashing of FIR No. 413 dated 20.09.2024 (PS Nissing, Karnal) under S. 75 JJ Act 2015 and Ss. 115, 351(2) BNS 2023 on basis of compromise deed dated 18.03.2025; genuineness verified by JMFC Karnal report dated 23.04.2025; inherent powers under S. 482 CrPC / S. 528 BNSS to quash proceedings in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding S. 320 CrPC; reliance on Kulwinder Singh (P&H FB), Gian Singh and Parbatbhai Aahir (SC); petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 allowed; FIR No. 413 dated 20.09.2024, Police Station Nissing, District Karnal, and all subsequent proceedings quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of the Compromise Deed dated 18.03.2025. ¶33

Sohan Lal Vs State of Haryana and Another — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 413 dated 20.09.2024, Police Station Nissing, District Karnal, and all subsequent proceedings taken in pursuance thereof should be quashed on the basis of the Compromise Deed dated 18.03.2025 between the parties. +1 more

¶13

Court's answer

In view of the amicable resolution of the issues amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings; furtherance of the proceedings is likely to be a waste of judicial time and there appears to be no chances of conviction.

¶31

Ratio / Principle

The compromise between the parties was found to be genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence, as reported by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karnal, vide report dated 23.04.2025.

¶18

Key takeaways

FIR No. 413 dated 20.09.2024, under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Sections 115, 351(2) of BNS, 2023, Police Station Nissing, District Karnal, and all subsequent proceedings taken in pursuance thereof, are quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of the Compromise Deed dated 18.03.2025.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of FIR on compromise — Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 allowed. FIR No. 413 dated 20.09.2024, Police Station Nissing, District Karnal, registered under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Sections 115, 351(2) of BNS, 2023, and all subsequent proceedings quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of Compromise Deed dated 18.03.2025, which the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karnal (report dated 23.04.2025) found genuine, voluntary and free from coercion. Following the Full Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Kulwinder Singh (2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052) and the Supreme Court in Gian Singh ((2012) 10 SCC 303) and Parbatbhai Aahir ((2017) 9 SCC 641), the Court held that continuation of proceedings after amicable resolution would serve no useful purpose, waste judicial time, and hold no prospect of conviction.

¶1

304

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

¶3

CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-17095-2025 DATE OF DECISION: 01.05.2025

¶5

SOHAN LAL ...PETITIONER

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ... RESPONDENTS

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

¶9

Present: Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. B.S.Virk, Sr. DAG, Haryana. Mr. Yaseen Sethi, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶10

¶11

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

¶12

This is a petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 for quashing the impugned FIR No. 413, dated 20.09.2024, under Section 75 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Sections 115, 351(2) of BNS, 2023, Police Station Nissing, District Karnal (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings taken in pursuance thereof on the basis of Compromise Deed dated 18.03.2025 (Annexure P-2).

¶13

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.

¶14

Anuradha 2025.05.02 00:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

CRM-M-17095-2025

¶16

¶17

Vide order dated 28.03.2025, parties were directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the genuineness of the compromise was called for.

¶18

The report dated 23.04.2025 has been received from Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karnal, stating that the parties have entered into a compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.

¶19

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that he has no objection if the petition is allowed.

¶20

Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 , has held:-

¶21

“ The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in noncompoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.

¶22

The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para-meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise

¶23

Anuradha 2025.05.02 00:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

CRM-M-17095-2025

¶25

¶26

is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.”

¶27

The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the

¶28

judgment were also approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of ' Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and another,(2012) 10

¶29

SCC 303'. Furthermore, the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section 482 were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

¶30

the matter of ' Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others versus State of Gujarat and another” (2017) 9 SCC 641 '.

¶31

It is evident that in view of the amicable resolution of the issues amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings. The furtherance of the proceedings is likely to be a waste of judicial time and there appears to be no chances of conviction.

¶32

In view of above, FIR No. 413, dated 20.09.2024, under Section 75 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Sections 115, 351(2) of BNS, 2023, Police Station Nissing, District Karnal (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings taken in pursuance thereof on the basis of Compromise Deed dated 18.03.2025 (Annexure P-2), is quashed qua the petitioner.

¶33

The present petition is hereby allowed.

¶34

(SANDEEP MOUDGIL) JUDGE

¶35

01.05.2025 anuradha

¶36

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶37

Anuradha 2025.05.02 00:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sohan Lal v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohan Lal v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunaina and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Prince Vs State of Haryana

Arush Jain Vs State of Ut, Chandigarh

Gurpreet Singh Alias Gopi Vs State of Punjab

Nitasha and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Lovely Vs State of Punjab and Others