Inherent power under Section 528 BNSS can quash FIR for non-compoundable offences if settlement and subsequent marriage show bleak conviction chances and no purpose served.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 528 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 363, 366, 376 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 6 - Quashing of FIR in non-compoundable offences - Inherent powers of High Court - Principles laid down in Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr.: (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.: (2012) 10 SCC 303 - Where parties have settled and entered into a valid marriage after the victim attained majority and have a child, continuing proceedings would serve no meaningful purpose and would disrupt stable family life - Scope of conviction is remote and bleak - FIR quashed to secure ends of justice. (Paras 8, 9, 10, 11)

(B) Quashing of criminal proceedings - Settlement between accused and victim - Even in non-compoundable cases, proceedings can be quashed on settlement if court is satisfied that conviction is remote and no meaningful purpose is served. (Para 9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought quashing of FIR registered under Section 363 IPC initially, with Sections 366/376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO added later. The petitioner and the prosecutrix were in love; they left their homes and married in Bihar in March 2023. However, as the prosecutrix was then a minor, she was brought back by police. She gave a statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. stating she went willingly. Charge-sheet was filed and charges framed; the victim in her deposition supported the petitioner. After attaining majority (even according to the prosecution's claimed date of birth), the couple married on 21.01.2025 and had a baby girl on 02.02.2026. The factum of marriage and birth was verified by police status report. The prosecutrix (respondent No.2) did not depose anything incriminating against the petitioner.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the case was from the year 2023 with very bleak chance of conviction. The parties were living a blissful matrimonial life, and continuing proceedings would disrupt their stable family life. The inherent power under Section 528 BNSS was invoked, relying on Narinder Singh and Gian Singh, to quash the FIR and all consequential proceedings.

Issues: The main issues were whether an FIR involving non-compoundable offences (including POCSO) could be quashed on the basis of settlement and subsequent marriage, and whether continuing the prosecution would serve any meaningful purpose.

Ratio Decidendi: The inherent powers of the High Court are not limited by the compoundability of offences. If the court is satisfied that there is no meaningful purpose in continuing proceedings, the scope of conviction is remote and bleak, and the parties have settled and are living a stable family life, the FIR can be quashed to secure the ends of justice.

Result: Petition allowed. FIR No. 177/2023 dated 25.03.2023, registered at P.S. Sagarpur, Delhi, under Section 363 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings, stands quashed.

JUDGMENT (oral)

1 . When the matter was taken up on 16.02.2026, the following facts were recorded:-

1. “Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 177/2023 dated 25.03.2023, registered at P.S. Sagarpur, Delhi, under Section 363 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties.

2. The charge-sheet has been filed and subsequently, Sections 366/376 of IPC and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, 2012 (POCSO) were added.

3. According to the petitioner, he was in love with the victim and they both left their respective homes in Delhi and went to Bihar where they solemnized marriage on 29.03.2023, as per Hindu rites and ceremonies at Maa Tara Mandir, Babu Tola, Banka, Bihar.

4. However, since the victim was found to be minor, she was brought back to Delhi by the police. Her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which she admitted that she had gone with the accused of her own free will and had even married him willingly.

5. However, keeping in mind the age of the victim, charge-sheet was filed before the learned Trial Court and charges have already been framed and even the statement of the victim has been recorded in which she has reiterated the abovesaid fact.

6. Though, according to the prosecution, she is minor but during her evidence she claimed herself to be major.

7. The important aspect is, however, that after attainting the age of discretion, even as per the date of birth claimed by the prosecution, they both entered into marriage and got their marriage registered before the Registrar of Marriage, Ghaziabad on 21.01.2025. So much so, the victim/prosecutrix has delivered a baby girl on 02.02.2026 from such wedlock.

8. It is in abovesaid backdrop that the quashing of FIR in question is being sought.

9. Learned APP for the State appears on advance notice. I.O.- SI Nitesh is also present.

10. Let the factum of subsequent marriage dated 21.01.2025 and the fact that they had been blessed with a girl child be verified.

11. Since the delivery is very recent, the victim is unable to appear physically. She would be at liberty to appear either physically or through video-conferencing.

12. List on 03.03.2026.”

2. In terms of the abovesaid directions, the status report has been filed today and as per the status report, the marriage certificate has been verified and the fact that the parties were blessed with a baby girl has also been verified.

3. Copies of marriage certificate and birth certificate have also been placed on record.

4. Charge-sheet has already been filed and the statement of the prosecutrix i.e. respondent No.2 has been recorded and learned APP for the State, in all fairness, submits that in her testimony, prosecutrix has not said anything incriminating against the petitioner.

5. Fact, however, remains that even as per the facts placed on record, petitioner and respondent No.2 were in love and they both left their respective homes and, eventually, solemnized marriage in the year 2023.

6. The case was registered because at that time, as per the prosecution, she had not attained the age of discretion and, admittedly, now after becoming major, she has entered into marriage with the petitioner and is living happily.

7. The factum of such marriage and the fact that they are blessed with a baby girl has been confirmed and verified.

8. In view of the above, since the present case is of the year 2023 with very bleak chance of it resulting in conviction coupled with the fact that respondent No.2 and petitioner are living a blissful matrimonial life, continuing with further proceedings would thus serve no meaningful purpose and would only disrupt their stable family-life. Reference in this regard be also made to Mohd. Parwej v. State, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 1030, Harmeet Singh v. State of GNCT Delhi & Ors. 2026:DHC:3142.

9. In Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr.: (2014) 6 SCC 466, the Apex Court observed that proceedings, even in non-compounda

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6484

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHISUMAN KUMAR – AppellantVersusSTATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. – RespondentCRL.M.C.-1271/2026

Inherent power under Section 528 BNSS can quash FIR for non-compoundable offences if settlement and subsequent marriage show bleak conviction chances and no purpose served.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SUMAN KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. – Respondent
CRL.M.C.-1271/2026