Petition under Section 528 BNSS sought quashing of an FIR registered at Amritsar on the basis of a compromise between the parties. The trial court reported that statements regarding the compromise could not be recorded as the parties failed to appear. The petition was dismissed for want of prosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
CRM-M-13291-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
314 CRM-M-13291-2026 Decided on :13.07.2026
Karanjeet Singh alias Karan and others . . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and another . . . Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: None for the petitioners.
Mr. Jasdeep Singh, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
1 . Instant petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, seeking quashing of FIR No. 31, under Sections 109, 351(2), 190 of BNS read with Section 307,506/149 Cr.P.C. and Sections 25/27 of Arms dated 1.03.2025, registered at Police Station Cantonment, District Amritsar and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise dated 23.10.2025(P-2), effected between the parties.
2 . On 11.03.2026 following was recorded by the co-ordinate
bench of this Court:
“ This is a petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 for quashing of FIR No.31, dated 12.03.2025, under Sections 109, 351(2), 190 of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Cantonment, District Amritsar (Annexure P-1), with all subsequent proceedings
RASHMI 2026.07.14 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-13291-2026
2
arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 23.10.2025 (Annexure P-2).
Notice of motion.
On the asking of the Court, Mr. H.S. Wadhwa, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State. Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2 and has filed Memo of Appearance, which is taken on record. He admits the factum of compromise entered into between the parties. List on 06.04.2026. In the meantime, the parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court within a period of two weeks from today, for recording of their statements with regard to the compromise. The trial Court is directed to submit a report on or before the next date of hearing containing the following information:-
3 . As per the report received from the Civil Judge (Senior
Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amritsar, in compliance
with the directions issued, statements of the victim and accused could not
be recorded, as parties did not choose to appear before the said Court.
RASHMI 2026.07.14 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
3
CRM-M-13291-2026
4 . In view of the above, present petition is dismissed for want
of prosecution.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE
13.07.2026 Rashmi Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No
RASHMI 2026.07.14 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Should FIR No. 31 and consequential proceedings be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties?
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Karanjeet Singh alias Karan and others
State of Punjab
Respondent No. 2
Sanjay Vashisth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
