The High Court may exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings based on a settlement between the parties, provided the offences are not heinous or serious in nature and the quashing prevents the abuse of the process of law.

ORAL ORDER

1) RULE

. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Aditya Jadeja and learned advocate Mr. Dharmesh Patel appear and waive service of notice of rule on behalf of their respective respondents.

2) By way of this application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ”the BNSS, 2023), the applicants have prayed for quashing and setting aside F.I.R. bearing C.R.No. 11188009260391 of 2026 registered with Modasa Town Police Station, Aravalli as well as other consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR.

3) Heard learned advocate Mr. Dharemsh Patel for the applicants, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Aditya Jadeja, for the respondent No. 1 – State and Mr. Dharmesh Patel learned advocate for the respondent No.2 – original complainant.

4) Both the learned advocates have jointly submitted that during the pendency of present application, the matter is amicably settled amongst the parties and therefore, any further continuation of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would create hardship to the parties and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law.

5) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the application and submitted that looking to averments made in the FIR, complaint may not be quashed.

6) Learned advocate Mr. Dharmesh Patel appearing for the complainant tenders the settlement affidavit, affirming, inter alia, by the respondent No. 2 – original complainant – Anilkumar Alamchand Shah, the same is ordered to be taken on record.

7) The affidavit of the respondent No. 2 - original complainant reads as under: -

“ I, Anilkumar Alamchand Shah, Hindu Adult, Aged 45 years, Male, Residing at 15, Gokul Society, Malpur Road, Modasa, Dist. Arvalli, filed this affidavit and state on oath as under:

1. That the deponent respondent no. 2 herein is the complainant of the complaint being Cr. No.11188009260391 of 2026 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 54 of The Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and 135 of the Gujarat Police Act registered with Modasa Town Police Station, Dist. Arvalli.

2. That the deponent most respectfully submits that at the intervention by the near and dear ones of the deponent as well as by the community members, the issue has been resolved.

3. That the deponent most respectfully submits that he has no grievance against all the accused and for the betterment of the relations of deponent and petitioners as well as to maintain peace, I am filing this affidavit in support of the present petition.

4. That the deponent is giving his consent by his free will and volition to quash the FIR being Cr. No. 11188009260391 of 2026 registered with Modasa Town Police Station, Dist. Arvalli and further proceedings thereof against all the petitioners accused.

What is stated herein above is true to the best of my knowledge and information and I believe the same to be true and correct.”

8) So far as Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is concerned, the Apex Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur Vs. State of Gujarat reported in AIR 2017 SC 4843, has observed in Para-15 as under:

“15. The broad principles which emerge from the precedents on the subject, may be summarised in the following propositions:

(i) Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognizes and preserves powers which inherent the High Court;

(ii) The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and t