JEEVAN AND OTHERS vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER — CRM-M/64918/2025

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 03-Dec-2025

CNR: PHHC011851032025

Filing Number

CRM-M/96800/2025

Filing Date

13-Nov-2025

Registration No

CRM-M/64918/2025

Registration Date

15-Nov-2025

Judge

Mr. Justice H.S. Grewal

Coram

Mr. Justice H.S. Grewal

Bench Type

Single

Category

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

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JEEVAN AND OTHERS

    Adv. SWATI VERMA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    Mr. Justice H.S. GrewalView PDF

    Summary of CRM-M/64918/2025 The High Court of Punjab & Haryana quashed FIR No. 0028 (dated 05.03.2021) under IPC Sections 324, 323, and 34 filed against Jeevan and others at Police Station Civil City, Batala. The court found that the parties had voluntarily compromised the dispute (arising from an accident) through a deed dated 04.11.2025, confirmed by the trial magistrate's report, and neither the State nor respondents disputed the compromise's genuineness. Following established precedent, the court held no useful purpose remained in continuing trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/64918/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CRM-M/64918/2025 The High Court of Punjab & Haryana quashed FIR No. 0028 (dated 05.03.2021) under IPC Sections 324, 323, and 34 filed against Jeevan and others at Police Station Civil City, Batala. The court found that the parties had voluntarily compromised the dispute (arising from an accident) through a deed dated 04.11.2025, confirmed by the trial magistrate's report, and neither the State nor respondents disputed the compromise's genuineness. Following established precedent, the court held no useful purpose remained in continuing trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case