Allowed¶8

Resham Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Feb 2026CRM-M/66415/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compromise-based quashing of FIR and consequential proceedings via inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (CRM-M petitions); genuineness of settlement verified through reports dated 16.02.2026 of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalalabad; four accused in FIR and seven in DDR, none proclaimed offender or in any other FIR; relies on Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 (Full Bench) and Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 (Supreme Court); petitions allowed, proceedings quashed qua petitioners; photocopy of order on connected file(s).

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the FIR in question and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioners, on the basis of the compromise between the parties. ¶8

Resham Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the FIR in question and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioners, on the basis of the compromise between the parties.

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR in question and the criminal proceedings arising therefrom can be quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the petitioner and the complainant, in exercise of the Court's inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to secure the ends of justice.

¶7

Court's answer

On the trial Court's report of amicable settlement between the petitioner and the complainant, quashing the FIR will accord a quietus to all disputes between the parties; no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings, and to secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed.

¶7

Ratio / Principle

The present petitions are allowed and all other consequential proceedings arising from the FIR are quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of the compromise; photocopy of the order is to be placed on the connected file(s).

¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of FIR on the basis of inter-se compromise (CRM-M-66415-2025 and connected case): Reports dated 16.02.2026 of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalalabad recorded statements of the concerned persons confirming a genuine settlement, without undue influence or coercion, with four accused in the FIR and seven persons in the DDR, none proclaimed offender or involved in any other FIR. Relying on Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 (Full Bench) — the High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow compounding of non-compoundable offences and quash prosecution to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice, a power not confined to matrimonial disputes — and Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 — inherent power may be exercised where a compromise has been effected, distinct from the power of a criminal court to compound offences under Section 320 of the Code — the Court found that quashing the FIR would accord a quietus to all disputes and that no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings. Petitions allowed; FIR and all consequential proceedings quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of the compromise; photocopy of the order to be placed on the connected file(s).

¶1

PARVEEN KUMAR

¶2

2026.02.20 19:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶3

This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated 28.11.2025, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the compromise.

¶4

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, reports dated 16.02.2026 have been received from the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalalabad. A perusal of the said reports reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been 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 are four accused in FIR and 7 in DDR. None of the accused has been declared as proclaimed offender and is not involved in any other FIR.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the case file.

¶6

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 non-compoundable 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.

¶7

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.02.20 19:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶8

CRM-M-66415-2025 and connected case -3-

¶9

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

¶10

Singh 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:-

¶11

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

¶12

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 ”

¶13

7. In view of the afore-referred judgments, perusing the report

¶14

of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioner and

¶15

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.

¶16

8. Resultantly, the present petitions are allowed

¶17

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.02.20 19:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶18

CRM-M-66415-2025 and connected case -4-

¶19

and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of the compromise. 9. Photocopy of this order be placed on the connected file(s).

¶20

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.02.20 19:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Resham Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Resham Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

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

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Wadhwa Vs State of Haryana and Another

Pargat Singh Vs Sher Singh and Anr.

Jatinder Mittal and Another Vs Naveen Kant

Sarabjit Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Gourav Kumar @ Gourav @ Gora Vs State of Punjab

Satish Kumar @ Tinu Vs State of Haryana