The High Court may exercise its inherent power to quash criminal proceedings for non-compoundable offences where the dispute is private, predominantly civil in nature, and parties have reached a voluntary settlement, provided there is no overriding public interest and the continuation of proceedings would be an exercise in futility.

1. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [“BNSS”], (corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [“CrPC”]), seeking quashing of FIR No. 288/2021 dated 08.08.2021, registered at Police Station Jagatpuri, under Sections 323, 341, 354, 506, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [“IPC”], alongwith all proceedings arising therefrom, on the ground that the parties have amicably settled the dispute.

2. Issue notice. Mr. Hitesh Vali, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, accepts notice on behalf of the State. Mr. Pawan Varma, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

3. The petitioners are physically present in Court and have been identified by their learned counsel as well as by the Investigating Officer. Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are present through video conference and have likewise been identified by their respective learned counsel and the Investigating Officer.

4. The petition is taken up for consideration and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

5. According to the FIR, the complainant reported that on 06.08.2021, his 21-year-old daughter allegedly scolded certain children who were creating disturbance outside their residence. Subsequently, the family members of the children, namely the petitioners herein, alongwith others, are alleged to have physically assaulted her. When the complainant, his wife, and son intervened to prevent the assault, they too were allegedly attacked. It is further alleged that during the course of the incident, one of the accused misbehaved with the complainant’s daughter by touching her inappropriately and making threatening gestures.

6. A chargesheet was subsequently filed on 15.09.2021.

7. I am informed that the allegation under Section 354 of the IPC has arisen from a misunderstanding that occurred during the course of the altercation between the parties.

8. During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have amicably settled their dispute, as recorded in a Memorandum of Understanding dated 09.06.2024, without any monetary consideration.

9. Learned counsel for the parties have confirmed before this Court that the settlement has been arrived at voluntarily and without any coercion, undue influence, or pressure.

10. In light of the aforesaid, parties seek quashing of the impugned FIR.

11. The Supreme Court has held that, in appropriate circumstances, High Courts may, in exercise of their inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS (corresponding to Section 482 of the CrPC), quash criminal proceedings, including those relating to non-compoundable offences, where a compromise has been reached between the accused and the complainant, provided that no overriding public interest is prejudiced.

12. The Supreme Court, in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.¹(2012) 10 SCC 303. has held as follows:

“58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. No doubt, crimes are acts which have harmful effect on the public and consist in wrongdoing that seriously endangers and threatens the well-being of the society and it is not safe to leave the crime-doer only because he and the victim have settled the dispute amicably or that the victim h