Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dalel Singh And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 6 March, 2025
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:032216
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
124+278 CRM-M-6725-2025(O&M)
Decided on : 06.03.2025
Dalel Singh and others ......Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others
......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: Mr. S.S. Grewal, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. P.K. Jhanda, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Lakhan, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 6.
SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
CRM-9640-2025
i) Present application has been filed under Section 528 of
BNSS, for placing on record affidavit Annexures A-1 to A-5.
ii) For the reasons enumerated in the application, same is
allowed and the documents are taken on record. Registry is directed to
tag the same at appropriate place with the paper-book.
CRM-M-6725-2025
1. Instant petition has been filed under Section 582 of the
BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 482 Cr.P.C.), seeking quashing of the below
detailed First Information Report (FIR), and all the consequential
proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise dated
01.06.2024(Annexure P-2), effected between the parties.
DETAILS OF CRIMINAL CASE:-
FIR No. Date Section(s) Police District
Station
440 13.11.2016 148, 149, 323, 342, 427, Kundli Sonipat
452, 506 of IPC
1 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 10-03-2025 23:42:39 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:032216
2
2. At the first instance some of the accused had filed quashing
petition i.e. CRM-M-34868-2024 for quashing of the proceedings of
aforesaid FIR. While entertaining the prayer of the accused/petitioners,
co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 12.12.2024 recorded
that one of the victim namely Savita has neither been arrayed as
respondent ; nor her statement was recorded before learned trial
Court/Illaqa Magistrate and the petition was dismissed by granting liberty
to the petitioners to file a fresh petition and it was also clarified that there
would be no necessity to re-examine the complainant-victim, other
victim(s) and the accused, whose statements stand recorded. Relevant
part of the order reads as under:
“ANALYSIS AND REASONING
5. An analysis of the FIR reveals that there are specific
allegations that the accused had also given beatings to Savita.
However, the petitioners have neither arraigned her as
respondent in this case nor her statements has been recorded
before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.
6. Since all the victims did not state their no objection to the
compromise and also the reasons which led to the compromise,
as such this Court cannot proceed further in this matter.
7. Given above, the petition is dismissed. However, liberty is
reserved to the petitioners to file a fresh petition and there would
be no necessity to re-examine the complainant-victim, other
victim(s) and the accused, whose statements stand recorded. The
copies of the statements alongwith report would suffice.
Petition dismissed in terms mentioned above, with liberty
reserved.
December 12, 2024 (ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE"
3. It is thereafter, petitioners approached this Court by way of
filing of present petition, seeking quashing of the aforementioned FIR
and all other consequential proceedings, by impleading Savita and
Inderjeet as party/respondents No. 5 and 6 respectively.
2 of 8
::: Downloaded on – 10-03-2025 23:42:40 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:0322163
4. Mr. S.S. Grewal, Advocate, submits that infact statements of
victim Savita and Inderjeet have already been recorded in the earlier
round of litigation, therefore, there being no necessity to re-record the
statements, counsel refers to report dated 12.09.2024 sent by learned
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sonipat, in compliance of the order dated
23.07.2024 passed in CRM-M-34868-2024. For reference, report dated
12.09.2024 is reproduced herebelow:
” Petitioners were also directed to deposit cost of Rs.
25,000/- (collectively) with Sadhna Society for Care of Blind,
Sector-26, Chandigarh, Account No. 10506615304, IFSC Code
SBIN0003246, State Bank of India, Sector-7, Chandigarh, on or
before the date of recording of their statement and produced the
receipt of the same to the trial Court/Illaga Magistrate.
It is humbly submitted that on 27.08.2024, application was
moved on behalf of complainant on the ground that complainant
and his family member could not appear due to death of their
relative and victim/injured Sonu has not been granted leave from
Air Force. Print Out of online transaction of Rs. 25,000/- in
favour of Sadhna Society for Care of Blinds, Sector 26,
Chandigarh was placed on record. It is further submitted that on
joint request, matter was adjourned to 04.09.2024.
It is further submitted that on 04.09.2024, accused
persons placed on record copy of receipt No. 8746 dated
04.09.2024 to substantiate that an amount of Rs. 25,000/- has
been deposited by them collectively with Sadhna Society for Care
of Blinds, Sector 26, Chandigarh in compliance of order passed
by Hon’ble High Court. Copy of receipt is Ex. C1.
Complainant/victim/injured persons namely Sonia w/o Neeraj,
Sonu S/o Inderjeet, Bala w/o Inderjeet and Inderjeet S/o Chhotu
and accused person namely Dalel Singh son of Sh. Chander
Bhan, Rambir Singh son of Sh. Chander Bhan, Kale @ Fale @
Davinder son of Sh. Chander Bhan, Smt. Sushila wife of Sh.
Dalel Singh, Smt. Asha wife of Davinder Singh, Smt. Urmila wife
of Sh. Rambir Singh had appeared before the Court and suffered
their separate statements. All the victim/injured except Inderjeet
and Savita are party to the present petition. It is further submitted
that name of victim/injured Savita also revealed in the statement
of Investigasting Officer and she had not appeared on
04.09.2024. Notice were issued to secure her presence and on
12.09.2024, she has appeared before the Court and has suffered
her statement.
In respect of the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth
information as sought by the Hon’ble High Court, it is humbly
submitted that as per record and Statement of Investigating
Officer SI Naresh Kumar, posted at PS Kundli, Sonepat recorded
separately, the compromise has been effected between the parties
on 01.06.2024 with the intervention of respectable person. It is
further stated that there is one complainant namely Sonia wife of
Neeraj and four victims/injured in the present case namely Sonu
3 of 8
::: Downloaded on – 10-03-2025 23:42:40 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:032216
4
son of Sh. Inderjit, Bala wife of Sh. Inderjit, Inderjit son of
Chottu Lala and Savita wife of Sonu and there was seven accused
namely Dalel – Singh son of Sh. Chander Bhan, Rambir Singh
son of Sh. Chander Bhan, Kale @ Fale @ Davinder son of Sh.
Chander Bhan, Smt. Sushila wife of Sh. Dalel Singh, Smt. Asha
wife of Davinder Singh, Smt. Urmila wife of Sh. Rambir Singh
and proceedings against accused Sukhbir son of Chander Bhan
Singh dropped vide order dated 17.03.2024 in the present FIR as
he had died. Both the complainant and accused are party to the
compromise. However, victim Inderjeet and Savita are not party
and other victim/injured are parties. It is further submitted that
challan has been filed against the accused. Accused are not
proclaimed offender in the present case and accused Davender is
involved in one more criminal case bearing FIR No. 415/2023
u/s 279, 338 IPC, PS Alipur, Delhi and accused Rambir is
involved in one more case bearing FIR No. 11/2013 under
Sections 420, 120B IPC PS Crime Branch, North Delhi and other
accused are not involved in any other FIR/criminal case.
It is further submitted that complainant Sonia has suffered
a statement to the effect that she is complainant in the present
case bearing FIR no. 440 dated 13.11.2016 under Sections 148,
149, 323, 342, 427, 452 and 506 IPC, Police Station Kundli,
Sonipat. The compromise has been effected between the parties
on 01.06.2024. She has entered into the compromise voluntarily
and the compromise has been effected between the parties
amicably, without undue influence or coercion. She has no
grievance against the accused. Original compromise has already
been submitted before the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High
Court.
It is further submitted that injured/victim Sonu S/o
Inderjeet, Bala w/o Inderjeet and Inderjeet S/o Chhotu have
suffered separate statements to the effect they are injured/victim
in the present case bearing FIR no. 440 dated 13.11.2016 under
Sections 148, 149, 323, 342, 427, 452 and 506 IPC, Police
Station Kundli, Sonipat. The compromise has been effected
between the parties on 01.06.2024. They have entered into the
compromise voluntarily and the compromise has been effected
between the parties amicably, without undue influence or
coercion. They have no grievance against the accused. Original
compromise has already been submitted before the Hon’ble
Punjab & Haryana High Court.
It is further submitted that injured/victim Savita has
suffered separate statements to the effect that she is
injured/victim in the present case bearing FIR no. 440 dated
13.11.2016 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 342, 427, 452 and 506
IPC, Police Station Kundli, Sonipat. The compromise has been
effected between the parties. She has entered into the compromise
voluntarily and the compromise has been effected between the
parties amicably, without undue influence or coercion. She has
no grievance against the accused.
Accused Dalel Singh, Smt. Sushila, Smt. Asha, Smt.
Urmila and Inderjeet have also suffered separate statement to the
effect that they are accused in the present case bearing FIR No.
4 of 8
::: Downloaded on – 10-03-2025 23:42:40 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:032216
5
440 dated 13.11.2016 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 342, 427,
452 and 506 IPC, Police Station Kundli, Sonipat. The
compromise has been effected between the parties on 01.06.2024
with the intervention of respectable person. They have entered
into the compromise voluntarily and the compromise has been
effected between the parties amicably, without undue influence or
coercion. They have not been declared Proclaimed Offender in
present case and they are not involved in any other FIR/criminal
case. Original compromise has already been submitted before the
Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. As per order of Hon’ble
Punjab & Haryana High Court, an amount of Rs. 25,000/-have
been deposited collectively in the account of Society for the Care
of Blind vide receipt No. 8746 dated 04.09.2024 and copy of
receipt is Ex. Cl.
Accused Rambir Singh has also suffered statement to the
effect that he is accused in the present case bearing FIR No. 440
dated 13.11.2016 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 342, 427, 452
and 506 IPC, Police Station Kundli, Sonipat. The compromise
has been effected between the parties on 01.06.2024 with the
intervention of respectable person. He has entered into the
compromise voluntarily and the compromise has been effected
between the parties amicably, without undue influence or
coercion. He has not been declared Proclaimed Offender in the
present case and he is involved in one more case bearing FIR No.
11/2013 under Sections 420, 120B IPC PS Crime Branch, North
Delhi. Original compromise has already been submitted before
the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. As per order of
Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, an amount of Rs.
25,000/- have been deposited collectively in the account of
Society for the Care of Blind vide receipt No. 8746 dated
04.09.2024 and copy of receipt is Ex. Cl.
Accused Kale @ Fale @ Davinder has also suffered
statement to the effect that he is accused in the present case
bearing FIR No. 440 dated 13.11.2016 under Sections 148, 149,
323, 342, 427, 452 and 506 IPC, Police Station Kundli, Sonipat.
The compromise has been effected between the parties on
01.06.2024 with the intervention of respectable person. He has
entered into the compromise voluntarily and the compromise has
been effected between the parties amicably, without undue
influence or coercion. He has not been declared Proclaimed
Offender in present case and he is involved in one more criminal
case bearing FIR No. 415/2023 u/s 279, 338 IPC, PS Alipur,
Delhi. Original compromise has already been submitted before
the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. As per order of
Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, an amount of Rs.
25,000/- have been deposited collectively in the account of
Society for the Care of Blind vide receipt No. 8746 dated
04.09.2024 and copy of receipt is Ex. C1.
Being satisfied that the statements were being voluntarily
made, statements of both the parties were recorded on oath,
wherein they have acknowledged of having entered into
compromise.
5 of 8
::: Downloaded on – 10-03-2025 23:42:40 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:032216
6
In view of the statements of interested parties, this court is
satisfied that the compromise has been arrived between the
parties and the said compromise is genuine, voluntary, without
any coercion or undue influence. Statement of the parties and
Investigating Officer in original are attached.”
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that in view of
the report received from the learned Court Below and the affidavits
(Annexure A-1 to A-5) there on record, it is evident that dispute has been
resolved and private parties have effected a compromise, and there
remains no dispute amongst them requiring any adjudication. Further
submits that in view of the compromise, so effected between the private
parties, pendency of the FIR and consequential proceedings emanating
therefrom would be sheer abuse of the process of law, and the same may
be quashed.
6. Learned State counsel as also learned counsel for private
respondent(s), after going through the statements, the report received
from learned Court below as well as the affidavits (Annexures A-1 to A-
5), very fairly admit that the private parties have resolved their dispute
and effected a compromise and that they have no objection, if the FIR
(supra) and all the consequential proceedings are quashed on the basis of
the compromise.
7. Through catena of judgments, Hon’ble the Apex Court and
High Courts (including Punjab and Haryana High Court), have culled out
various principles of law concerning quashing of proceedings emanating
after lodging of FIR, and some of them are as under:-
x Power under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 582 BNSS can be
exercised to enhance social amity, and to reduce friction.
x Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord,
landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such
matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its
powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 582 BNSS in the event of
a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to
such cases.
6 of 8
::: Downloaded on – 10-03-2025 23:42:40 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:0322167
x There can never be any hard and fast category which can be
prescribed to enable the Court to exercise its power under Section
482 Cr.P.C./Section 582 BNSS “to prevent abuse of the process of
any Court” or “to secure the ends of justice”.
x No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) Cr.P.C./Section 359
BNSS, or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the power
under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C./Section 582 of the BNSS.
x The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of
harmony and orderly behaviour.
x High Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in
non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section
320 Cr.P.C./Section 359 BNSS, in order to prevent the abuse of law
and to secure the ends of justice.
x Power under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 582 BNSS is to be
exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of
Court.
x Such power has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it
sparingly and with utmost care and caution.
x The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint.
x The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to
maintain and control social order.
x The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace,
harmony and ever-lasting congeniality in society.
x Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two
warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and
prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full
effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful
composition of the society or would promote savagery.
x Matters which can be categorized as personal in nature or where
nature of injuries do not exhibit mental depravity or involves
commission of an offence of such a serious nature that quashing of
FIR would override the public interest, the Court can quash the
FIR in view of the settlement arrived at amongst the parties.
In this regard, judgments cited are:
1. Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, (2012) 10
SCC 303 (SC);
7 of 8
::: Downloaded on – 10-03-2025 23:42:40 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:0322168
2. Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur
and others v. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC
641 (SC);
3. Ramgopal and another v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021
SCC Online SC 834 (SC); and
4. Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and
another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 [P&H FB]
8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going
through the material available on record, this Court finds that there
appears to be substance in the submission of learned counsel for the
petitioners that pendency of the present criminal litigation would be
abuse of process of law since the chances of conviction of the petitioners
are bleak in view of the compromise, so effected between the private
parties.
9. The report alongwith statements of the affected parties
received from learned Court below as well as the affidavits (Annexures
A-1 to A-5), would reveal that the complainant/victim person(s)have
genuinely effected a compromise with the petitioners and they no
objection, if the impugned FIR and consequential proceedings are
quashed.
10. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances
of the case, including the report received by this Court and also, taking
into consideration the aforementioned settled principles of law, this
petition is accepted and FIR (as detailed in para No. 1 above) and all
the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed
qua the petitioners.
11. Petition stands disposed of.
06.03.2025 (SANJAY VASHISTH)
rashmi JUDGE
Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO
Whether Reportable: YES/NO
8 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 10-03-2025 23:42:40 :::