MANPREET SINGH AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS — CRM-M/52653/2025

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC011511742025

Filing Number

CRM-M/79114/2025

Filing Date

16-Sep-2025

Registration No

CRM-M/52653/2025

Registration Date

16-Sep-2025

Judge

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Coram

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

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.MANPREET SINGH AND ANOTHER

    Adv. Tarun Singla

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

  3. 3.HARPREET SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

  3. 3.HARPREET SINGH

  4. 4.JASKARAN SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Sanjay VashisthView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M-52653/2025 The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed FIR No.130 (dated 22.09.2022) registered at Police Station Raman, District Bathinda, against petitioners Manpreet Singh and another for offenses under IPC Sections 323, 324, 341, 506, and others. The court found that all parties had reached a genuine, voluntary compromise dated 05.09.2025 without coercion, confirmed by the trial court's verification report, and the private respondents consented to quashing the FIR. Following established Supreme Court and High Court precedents, Justice Sanjay Vashisth allowed the petition and quashed the DDR No.48 and all consequential proceedings, binding the parties to the compromise terms. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Sep-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/52653/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M-52653/2025 The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed FIR No.130 (dated 22.09.2022) registered at Police Station Raman, District Bathinda, against petitioners Manpreet Singh and another for offenses under IPC Sections 323, 324, 341, 506, and others. The court found that all parties had reached a genuine, voluntary compromise dated 05.09.2025 without coercion, confirmed by the trial court's verification report, and the private respondents consented to quashing the FIR. Following established Supreme Court and High Court precedents, Justice Sanjay Vashisth allowed the petition and quashed the DDR No.48 and all consequential proceedings, binding the parties to the compromise terms. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case