Pariminder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Pariminder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of FIR No.64 dated 10.04.2019 registered under Section 324 IPC (Section 326 IPC added later on) at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioner.

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No.64 dated 10.04.2019 registered under Section 324 IPC (with Section 326 IPC added later on) at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, can be quashed on the basis of the compromise dated 03.01.2025 arrived at between the parties.

Court's answer

Relying on the Supreme Court decisions in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543, and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, and given the trial Court's report that the compromise is genuine and without pressure, this Court held that no useful purpose can be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending since the complainant has himself compromised the dispute with the petitioner/accused.

Ratio / Principle

The present petition is allowed; FIR No.64 dated 10.04.2019 registered under Section 324 IPC (Section 326 IPC added later on) at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing petition (S.528 BNSS) by Pariminder Singh to quash FIR No.64 dated 10.04.2019 registered under Section 324 IPC (Section 326 IPC added later on) at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, together with all consequential proceedings, on the basis of compromise deed dated 03.01.2025 (Annexure P-3). The learned trial Court vide report dated 24.02.2026 found the compromise genuine and without any pressure, and respondent No.2's counsel admitted the factum of compromise. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543, and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, the High Court held that no useful purpose could be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending, allowed the petition, and quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings qua the petitioner.

CRM-M-8738-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

309

CRM-M-8738-2025 Date of decision: 23.03.2026

Pariminder Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY

Present : Mr. S.K. Kanojia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurdeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Rajinder Yadav, Advocate for Mr. Mandeep Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL)

The present petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, seeking quashing of FIR No.64 dated 10.04.2019 registered under Section 324 IPC (Section 326 IPC added later on) at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 03.01.2025 (Annexure P-3).

With the intervention of respectables and elderly persons of the society, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide compromise deed dated 03.01.2025 (Annexure P-3), which is duly signed by them. The matter was referred to the Court below for recording of statements of the parties and to report with respect to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The learned trial Court vide report dated 24.02.2026 has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure.

Respondent No.2 is represented by his counsel, who admits the

HAMANT 2026.03.24 14:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-8738-2025

2

factum of compromise.

In view of the aforesaid report of the trial Court and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in “ Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another ”, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and “ Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another ”, (2014) 6 SCC 466 , this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose can be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending, since the complainant has himself compromised the dispute with the petitioners/ accused persons.

In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned hereinabove, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.64 dated 10.04.2019 registered under Section 324 IPC (Section 326 IPC added later on) at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpu r and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise qua the present petitioner.

(AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE

23.03.2026 Hemant
	Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes	/ No
	Whether reportable	: Yes	/ No

HAMANT 2026.03.24 14:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document