Allowed¶42

Karampal Singh v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Jul 2026CRM-M/16548/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh (Shalini Singh Nagpal, J., oral), CRM-M-16548-2026 (O&M), decided 08.07.2026 — quashing of FIR No. 49 dated 12.02.2026 under Sections 318(4), 316(2) BNS 2023, PS Civil Lines Batala, District Batala, qua petitioner Karampal Singh on compromise with complainant Satinder Kaur; relies on Kulwinder Singh FB (2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052) and Gian Singh ((2012) 10 SCC 303); pending CRMs disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed: FIR No. 49 dated 12.02.2026 under Sections 318(4), 316(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Batala, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, quashed qua the petitioner; pending CRM(s), if any, disposed of accordingly. ¶42

Karampal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶42

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 49 dated 12.02.2026 under Sections 318(4), 316(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Batala, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, can be quashed on the basis of the compromise dated 03.03.2026 between the petitioner and the complainant. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

Following the principles of law laid down by the Full Bench Judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, and by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the petition seeking quashing on the basis of compromise is allowed.

¶42

Ratio / Principle

Learned State counsel and learned counsel for respondent No. 2 did not raise any dispute regarding the factum of compromise; since the matter has been amicably resolved, continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility.

¶38

Key takeaways

FIR No. 49 dated 12.02.2026 under Sections 318(4), 316(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Batala, along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed qua the petitioner.ratio¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing on basis of compromise — FIR No. 49 dated 12.02.2026 under Sections 318(4), 316(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Batala, quashed qua petitioner Karampal Singh on the basis of compromise dated 03.03.2026 with complainant Satinder Kaur. On the Court's direction of 27.03.2026, statements were recorded before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala (parties appeared 17.04.2026; IO ASI Rajbir Singh's statement recorded 18.04.2026), whose report found the compromise genuine, voluntary and without coercion or undue influence; challan was yet to be presented, the sole named accused was neither absconding nor proclaimed, and he was not involved in any other criminal case/FIR. Neither the State counsel nor counsel for respondent No. 2 disputed the factum of compromise; continuation of proceedings would have been an exercise in futility. Following the Full Bench judgment in Kulwinder Singh, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, and Gian Singh, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the petition was allowed and pending CRM(s) disposed of accordingly.

¶1

CRM-M-16548-2026 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

282

¶5

CRM-M-16548-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:08.07.2026

KARAMPAL SINGH

...Petitioner

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ...Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL

¶11

Present: Ms. Swati Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Hardeep Singh Wadhwa, DAG Punjab.

¶13

Ms. Manpreet, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

¶14

¶15

SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL, J. (ORAL)

¶16

Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 49 dated 12.02.2026 under Sections 318(4), 316(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Batala and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise 03.03.2026.

¶17

On 27.03.2026, this Court directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements with regard to compromise.

¶18

In compliance of the order dated 27.03.2026, parties appeared before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala on 17.04.2026. Statement of the Investigating Officer, ASI Rajbir Singh, Belt No. 573/KPT, Police Station Civil Lines, Batala was recorded on 18.04.2026. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala has submitted his report recording satisfaction that all the parties

¶19

AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.08 19:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

-2-

¶21

CRM-M-16548-2026 (O&M)

¶22

have entered into a valid compromise without any influence or coercion. Relevant portion of the report is reproduced as under:

¶23

“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/proclaimed person in the case? On this count, it was submitted by the investigating officer that in the present FIR there is only 01 named accused, he being:

¶24

a) Karampal Singh son of Gurmeet Singh

¶25

According to the statement suffered by the IO, there is only one person involved in the occurrence and he is party to the present petition and was present before the undersigned for recording of his statement. According to the statement of the investigating officer, said accused has not been declared as proclaimed person/offender nor is absconding in the present case.

¶26

2) The name of the complainant and injured/ aggrieved and whether all of them have appeared and made their statements in support of compromise.

¶27

Statement of the Investigating Officer was also recorded on this score and he stated that there is only one complainant namely Satinder Kaur in the present FIR. Complainant appeared before the undersigned for recording her statement and supported the compromise.

¶28

3) Stage of trial/proceedings?

¶29

As per record, challan is yet to be presented in the present case.

¶30

AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.08 19:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶31

CRM-M-16548-2026 (O&M)

¶32

-3-

¶33

4) If the compromise is genuine, voluntary and out of free will of the parties?

¶34

On 17.04.2026, petitioner/ accused and complainant/respondent appeared in the Court along with their respective Advocates and stated in unison that they had entered into a compromise without any extraneous influence, coercion and on their own volition. The complainant/respondent stated in specific terms that he had no objection if the quashing proceedings filed by the petitioner/accused is accepted. Both the parties were identified by their respective Advocates.

¶35

The respondent/complainant and petitioner/accused were asked to show their identity cards and photocopies of the same were taken on record (Photocopies of identity cards and statements attached herewith).

¶36

Therefore, from the statements of the parties, it appears that compromise entered into between the parties is genuine, voluntary and out of free will and without any coercion or undue influence and is not result of any fraud or misrepresentation.

¶37

5) Whether any other criminal case is pending against the accused? According to the statement of the investigating officer, accused is not involved in any other criminal case/FIR.”

¶38

Learned State counsel and learned counsel for respondent No. 2 have not raised any dispute regarding the factum of compromise. Since the matter has been amicably resolved, continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility.

¶39

AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.08 19:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶40

-4-

¶41

CRM-M-16548-2026 (O&M)

¶42

Following principles of law laid down by the Full Bench Judgment of this Court in “Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another” 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others” (2012) 10 SCC 303 , the petition is allowed.

¶43

FIR No. 49 dated 12.02.2026 under Sections 318(4), 316(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Batala with all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed qua the petitioner.

¶44

Pending CRM(s), if any, are also disposed of accordingly.

¶45

July 08, 2026

¶46

(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE

¶47

Ajay Goswami

¶48

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

¶49

AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.08 19:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Karampal Singh v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karampal Singh v. State of Punjab 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

Gagandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Gurwinder Singh Alias Gorkha Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Others

Gurpreet Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Another

Dharampal Vs Rajinder Singh and Another

Lovepreet Singh @ Labhu Vs State of Punjab

Shakuntala Bhatia Vs State of Haryana and Others