Punjab & Haryana High Court underscores the High Court’s wide inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings, even for non-compoundable offences, if the dispute is primarily private/civil in nature and has been fully settled between the parties — reaffirming settled Supreme Court precedent and providing binding guidance for future quashing petitions under Section 528 B.N.S.S.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CRM-M/13770/2025 of KARAMJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS |
| CNR | PHHC010392312025 |
| Date of Registration | 10-03-2025 |
| Decision Date | 10-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | ALLOWED |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Bench | Single Bench — MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts under jurisdiction of Punjab & Haryana High Court; persuasive elsewhere |
| Overrules / Affirms |
|
| Type of Law | Criminal Procedure — Inherent powers of High Court to quash FIRs/proceedings under Section 528 B.N.S.S. on basis of compromise in private/civil disputes |
| Questions of Law | Whether High Court can exercise inherent powers under Section 528 B.N.S.S. to quash criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences based on a genuine compromise between parties. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The High Court reaffirmed that its inherent powers under Section 528 B.N.S.S. can be exercised to quash FIRs or criminal proceedings even for non-compoundable offences if the dispute is overwhelmingly civil or private in nature, and the parties have arrived at a bona fide settlement. The Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence and ensure the compromise is genuine, voluntary, and not the result of coercion or undue influence. Heinous crimes or those affecting society at large remain outside the ambit of compromise-based quashing. Where the dispute is personal and fully resolved, continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process and quashing serves the ends of justice. |
| Judgments Relied Upon |
|
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court |
The inherent power of the High Court is plenary and unrestrained by statute except by self-imposed judicial guidelines to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of process. Section 528 B.N.S.S. is interpreted in line with Section 482 CrPC and established Supreme Court jurisprudence, distinguishing between wholly civil/private disputes (where quashing is possible) and serious offences affecting the public (where it is not). Court must verify genuineness and voluntariness of compromise with statements before Magistrate. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
FIR was registered on complaint by respondent No.2 under sections 279, 352, 354, 338, 323, 324, 427, 379, 506, and 509 of IPC. Parties, upon intervention of community members, resolved their dispute and effected a written compromise. Statements of all parties were recorded before the Magistrate, who confirmed compromise was genuine, voluntary, and without coercion. The petitioners were not declared proclaimed offenders. The High Court was approached seeking quashing on basis of this compromise. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the jurisdiction of Punjab & Haryana High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and the Supreme Court of India |
| Follows |
|
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reaffirms the continued applicability of well-settled Supreme Court guidelines for compromise-based quashing under the new Section 528 B.N.S.S.
- Reiterates that even non-compoundable offences that are civil/private in nature and settled amicably may be quashed if the settlement is genuine and voluntary.
- Stresses that the Magistrate’s verification of the compromise’s genuineness and voluntariness is essential.
- Confirms that continuation of criminal proceedings in such circumstances amounts to abuse of process.
- Clarifies that serious/heinous offences and crimes affecting society at large remain outside the ambit of compromise-based quashing.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted the statutory framework under Section 528 B.N.S.S. (analogous to Section 482 CrPC) and Section 359 B.N.S.S. (compounding of offences).
- It emphasized that the inherent power to quash proceedings is broad, to be used for securing justice or preventing abuse of process.
- Supreme Court judgments (Narinder Singh, B.S. Joshi, Gian Singh, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal) and Full Bench PHHC precedent (Kulwinder Singh) were explicitly relied upon.
- The Court summarized the position from Gian Singh: compromise-based quashing is appropriate for cases with civil or personal flavour, not for heinous or society-affecting crimes.
- The genuineness and voluntariness of the compromise were verified by the Magistrate via statements from all parties.
- The petitioners were not declared as proclaimed offenders.
- Finding the dispute to be personal/private and fully settled, the Court held that further proceedings would be an abuse of process and quashing was in the interests of justice.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Parties have amicably settled their inter se dispute with the intervention of respectables.
- Continuation of proceedings would be futile and amount to abuse of court process.
- FIR and all consequential proceedings should be quashed in the interest of justice.
Respondents (Complainant and Others)
- The compromise is genuine, voluntary, without coercion or undue influence, and effected out of free will.
State
- No separate opposing submissions are recorded; State’s appearance noted.
Factual Background
The FIR in question was registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Amritsar under various IPC sections including 279, 352, 354, 338, 323, 324, 427, 379, 506, and 509 on complaint by respondent No.2. After intervention by community members, the parties reached a written compromise dated 27.01.2025. Subsequently, the parties’ statements were recorded before the Magistrate, confirming genuineness and voluntariness of the compromise. The petitioners sought quashing of the FIR and all proceedings on this basis.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 528 B.N.S.S. grants the High Court inherent powers analogous to Section 482 CrPC, enabling interventions to secure justice or prevent abuse of court process.
- Section 359 B.N.S.S. prescribes procedure for compounding certain offences.
- The Court held that while compounding is governed by statute, inherent powers are broader, particularly for civil or private disputes settled by compromise.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment strictly applies and affirms well-established Supreme Court and Full Bench PHHC precedent regarding quashing on the basis of compromise in private/civil disputes under inherent powers.