MAJOR SINGH AND OTHERS vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER — CRM-M/8995/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 09-Apr-2026

CNR: PHHC010262222026

Filing Number

CRM-M/9776/2026

Filing Date

12-Feb-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/8995/2026

Registration Date

13-Feb-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj

Coram

Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj

Bench Type

Single

Category

38.21 - QUASHING PETITION COMPROMISE U/S 482 CRPC GEN ( 641 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MAJOR SINGH AND OTHERS

    Adv. PARAS JAGGA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Rajesh BhardwajView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/8995/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana quashed FIR No.23 (dated 20.01.2026) against Major Singh and others, registered under BNS Sections 109, 331(6), 324(4), 351(2), 191(3), 190 and Arms Act Sections 25/54/59, based on a genuine compromise reached between the parties on 03.02.2026. The trial court confirmed the settlement was voluntary, without fraud or coercion. Applying established Supreme Court precedent, Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj held that continuing proceedings would constitute abuse of process; since the parties resolved their dispute amicably and conviction was remote, quashing served the ends of justice and promoted peace between them. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/8995/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/8995/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana quashed FIR No.23 (dated 20.01.2026) against Major Singh and others, registered under BNS Sections 109, 331(6), 324(4), 351(2), 191(3), 190 and Arms Act Sections 25/54/59, based on a genuine compromise reached between the parties on 03.02.2026. The trial court confirmed the settlement was voluntary, without fraud or coercion. Applying established Supreme Court precedent, Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj held that continuing proceedings would constitute abuse of process; since the parties resolved their dispute amicably and conviction was remote, quashing served the ends of justice and promoted peace between them. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case