Allowed

Shambhu Parsad Gaur v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Feb 2026CRM-M/22847/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition to quash an FIR registered under Sections 283 and 337 IPC on the basis of a compromise. The trial court confirmed the settlement was genuine. Following Kulwinder Singh and Gian Singh, the High Court quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings qua the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.0004 dated 20.01.2023 under Sections 283, 337, 337 IPC, P.S. Daba, Ludhiana, and all consequential proceedings quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of compromise dated 18.04.2025.

Shambhu Parsad Gaur Vs State of Punjab and Another — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

�� ��

�� 

��

��

�� !�"�#�$��%�&�"$

��#��$

'�$�"�

��#"�(�!��%��$

��)��%��

�� 

#$�� $��+�(��%�$�#�,��-��..�$/�0%1��/��$��)��$� Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab

¶13

�$��'�)",�2�!"��/�0%1��/��$�$��)��%��3��

¶14

¶15

��

¶16

4� The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.0004 dated 20.01.2023, registered under Sections 283, 337, 337 IPC, at Police Station Daba, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 18.04.2025 (Annexure P-3).

¶17

This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 19.11.2025, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the compromise.

¶18

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 30.01.2026 has been received from the Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Ludhiana. A perusal of the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been

¶19

DINESH 2026.02.04 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

��

¶21

recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled between them and they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. The compromise effected between them is genuine, without any undue influence and coercion. It is stated in the report that there is only one accused. Accused has not been declared as proclaimed offender and is not involved in any other FIR.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the

¶23

case file.

¶24

The Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, held that High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of noncompoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court is of the view that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.

¶25

Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in the case of Gian Singh

¶26

vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment reads thus:-

¶27

“57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its

¶28

DINESH 2026.02.04 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶29

�� ��!

¶30

inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code.

¶31

Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. XXX---XXX ”

¶32

7 . In view of the afore-referred judgments, perusing the report of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner and the complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a quietus to all disputes between the parties and it is in the interest of both sides to bury the hatchet and lead a peaceful life. Thus, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings and in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings in the present case deserve to be quashed.

¶33

8 . Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.0004 dated 20.01.2023, registered under Sections 283, 337, 337 IPC, at Police Station Daba, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of the compromise dated 18.04.2025.

¶34

�� "#�$��%�&!�� & '� %�� 5��$��)��.�� 6��73� 5��$�$�)�$��!,� � 6��73�

¶35

DINESH 2026.02.04 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Shambhu Parsad Gaur v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shambhu Parsad Gaur v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

Davinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Surjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Lovepreet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Narender Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sukhdev Singh Alias Laddu Vs State of Punjab

Dharam Singh Vs State of Haryana