Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/24200/2026 of JAMIL KHAN AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER on 16 July 2026
1- 289 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-24200-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.07.2026 JAMIL KHAN AND OTHERS ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. J.S. Jaidka, Advocate for Mr.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-24200-2026 (O&M)
Date of decision: 16.07.2026
JAMIL KHAN AND OTHERS
...PETITIONERS
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
...RESPONDENTS
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL
Present:
Mr. J.S. Jaidka, Advocate for
Mr. Abhishek Khullar, Advocate
for petitioners.
Mr. Hardeep Singh Wadhwa, DAG Punjab.
Mr. Lovepreet Singh, Advocate for
Ms. Garima Arora, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
***
SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Petitioners seek quashing of complaint No.SC/1403/2021 dated 06.10.2021 titled ‘Darshan Singh Vs. Jamil Khan and Etc.’ under Section 3 Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 500, 506 and 34 Indian Penal Code, Police Station Samrala, District Ludhiana and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 17.03.2022.
2. On 01.05.2026, this Court directed the parties to appear before learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements on the basis of compromise.
3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, parties appeared before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana on 18.05.2026. Learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana has submitted her report recording satisfaction that all the parties have entered into a valid compromise without any influence or coercion. Point-wise report as under has been submitted: “3. Accordingly, in compliance with the order dated 01.05.2026, passed by Hon'ble High Court, complainant Darshan Singh appeared in the Court with counsel on 18.05.2026 and suffered statement to the effect that the present complaint under Section 3 of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Act 1989 and Section 500,506,34 IPC was filed at Samrala Court against accused Jamil Khan, Sabo and Tanvir Mohd. which was lateron committed to the Court of Sessions. He stated that the matter had been compromised between him and accused Jamil Khan, Sabo and Tanvir Mohd. with the intervention of respectable of the society and there was no other accused except the above mentioned three accused and that no accused was declared as Proclaimed Offender in this case. He further stated that the compromise was effected without any coercion or undue pressure and he had no objection if the aforementioned complaint was quashed by Hon'ble High Court.
4. On the same date, accused Jamil Khan, Sabo and Tanvir Mohd., alongwith counsel also appeared in the Court and got recorded a joint statement to the effect that complaint under Section 3 of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Act 1989 and Section 500,506,34 IPC was filed at Samrala Court against them by complainant Darshan Singh which was lateron committed to the court of Sessions. They stated that the matter had been compromised between them and complainant Darshan Singh with the intervention of respectable of the society. They further stated that there was no other accused except them and none of them was ever declared as Proclaimed Offender in this case. They stated that except the present complaint case, they were not accused in any other FIR or complaint and that the compromise was done without any coercion or undue pressure.
5. On the basis of above said statements of complainant Darshan Singh and accused Jamil Khan, Sabo and Tanvir Mohd. and on the basis of interaction with the parties, it is reflected that this is a private complaint filed by complainant Darshan Singh under Section 3 of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Act 1989 and Sections 500,506,34 IPC against accused Jamil Khan, Sabo and Tanvir Mohd., which was committed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Samrala. It is also reflected that the matter had been compromised between the parties with the intervention of respectable of the society and there was no other accused except the above mentioned three accused and no accused was declared as Proclaimed Offender in this case and accused were not involved in any other FIR or complaint and that the compromise was effected between the parties without any coercion or undue pressure.”
4. Learned State counsel and learned counsel for respondent No.2 have not raised any dispute regarding the factum of compromise between petitioners and respondent no.2.
5. Since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility.
6. Following principles of law laid down by the Full Bench Judgment of this Court in “Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another” 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and others” (2012) 10 SCC 303, the petition is allowed.
7. Complaint No.SC/1403/2021 dated 06.10.2021 titled ‘Darshan Singh Vs. Jamil Khan and Etc.’ under Section 3 Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 500, 506 and 34 Indian Penal Code, Police Station Samrala, District Ludhiana and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed qua the petitioners.
8. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) 16.07.2026
JUDGE Sumit Singla Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No