The court can quash an FIR when the complainant withdraws support due to resolution of misunderstandings, as a measure to prevent abuse of legal processes.

JUDGMENT :

GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.

The present Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking following reliefs:

Prayers in WP/4334/2025

“(a). This Hon’ble Court be pleased to invoke its inherent jurisdiction under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and to pass a direction to quash and/or set aside First Information Report No.118 of 2025 registered on 20.02.2025 with MHB Colony Police Station U/s. 126(2), 351(3), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 at the instance of respondent no.2.

Prayer in WP/2412/2025

“(i) The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside C.R. No.118 of 2025 registered with M.H.B. Colony Police Station for the offence punishable under sections 126(2), 351(3), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in consequence of settlement of issue between the petitioner and the respondent no.2.”

2. The petitioners in these writ petitions are co-accused persons in the FIR bearing CR No.118 of 2025 dated 22^nd February 2025 registered with MHB Colony police station. The FIR was lodged at the instance of the respondent-Shailesh Shivanand Pandey in both the writ petitions. The allegations in the FIR pertains to criminal intimidation and wrongful restraint over differences arising from business rivalries. The parties have now amicably settled their differences.

3. The affidavit of consent on behalf of the respondent-Shailesh Shivanand Pandey dated 17^th November 2025 is on record which states that the FIR was lodged pursuant to misunderstanding between parties which now have been settled and he has no objection to quashing of the FIR. It is also on record that the respondent/complainant has submitted his affidavit dated 22^nd February 2025 to the concerned investigating officer seeking withdrawal of the said FIR. The parties are present in the Court and identified by their respective counsel. The parties have affixed their signature and recorded their appearance in their own handwriting which shall now for part of the proceedings.

4. In “Shiji v. Radhika” (2011) 10 SCC 705 the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that while dealing with a dispute which was purely a personal one and complainant is no longer ready to support the allegations on the ground that the allegations arose from misunderstanding and misconceptions, inherent powers of the High Court can be exercised to prevent abuse of process of law. As the parties have amicably settled their disputes, no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings. Writ Petition No.4334 of 2025 is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and Writ Petition No.2412 of 2025 is allowed in terms of prayer clause (i) quoted above.