The High Court may exercise its inherent power to quash criminal proceedings in matrimonial disputes where parties have reached an amicable settlement, provided the offences are not heinous or against society, to prevent the abuse of the process of law.

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

1. By way of present petition filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, i2023, prayer has been made by the petitioners-accused for quashing of FIR No.26 dated 16.07.2025, registered at Women Police Station Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 85 , 351(2), 352, 74, 3(5) of the BNS, along with consequential proceedings pending in the competent Court of law.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings, came to be lodged at the behest of respondent No.2-Ms. Sajni Kumari (hereinafter, ‘complainant’), who alleged that her marriage was solemni.sed with petitioner No.1-Keshav Gupta on 07.10.2022 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies and since then, she has been constantly harassed and tortured for bringing less dowry. Besides above, she also alleged that during her stay at matrimonial house, she was given beatingsf on very trivial issues. Since on account of aforesaid matrimonial discord, parties were unable to live together, complainant started living separately since 17.03.2025, and thereafter, petitioner No.1 alsor initiated divorce proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act in the competent Court of law. In the afore background, FIR, detailed hereinabove, came to be lodged against the petitioners.

3. Though after completion of investigation, Police has already presented Challan in the competent Court of law, but before same could be taken to its logical end, parties have entered into compromise, whereby ithey have decided to settle their dispute amicably inter se them.

4. In terms of compromise, petitioner No.1 as well as complainant have decided to get their marriage dissolved by way of mutual consent under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act. In terms of compromise, sum of ₹32,00,000/- is to be paid to the complainant as well as her minor son. Out of ₹32,00,000/-, ₹16,00,000/- is being paid to the complainant by way of two demand drafts of ₹8,00,000/- each and another sum of ₹8,00,000/- shall be paid in the name of complainant at the time of her making statement of first motion under Section 13(B) of the Hindu. Marriage Act. Remaining sum of ₹8,00,000/- shall be paid in the name of her minor son at the time of her making statement of second motion. In afore background, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings for quashing of FIR as well as confsequent proceedings pending in the competent Court of law.

5. In terms of order passed by this Court, respondent-State has filed status report, which isr completely silent about compromise. Complainant has come present and is being represented by Ms. Shrutika, Advocate. Complainant states on oath that she of her own volition and without there being any external pressure, has entered into compromise with the petitioners/accused, whereby they have decided to settle their dispute amicably inter se them. She states that FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings is result of misunderstanding, coupled with the ifact that petitioners have already apologized for their misbehavior and have undertaken not to repeat such act in future. She states that since she as well as petitioner No.1 have already decided to get their marriage dissolved by way of mutual consent and in terms of compromise, she has already received some amount, she do not wish to prosecute the case further and shall have no objection in case FIR in question as well as conse