Inherent powers can quash non-heinous offences if parties amicably settle, promoting justice and judicial efficiency.

O R D E R

The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.26 of 2020 registered by the Mavoor Police Station alleging the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 326 and 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , to quash all further proceedings in the above case. It is asserted that the dispute that led to the registration of the crime has been amicably settled between the petitioners and the 3^rd respondent, who has executed Annexure A2 affidavit, affirming the settlement.

3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the learned Counsel for the 3^rd respondent.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits that during the pendency of the Crl.M.C., the 1^st petitioner died and the case against the 2^nd petitioner has already been quashed as per the order dated 24.03.2023 in Crl.M.C.No.1005 of 2023. However, the dispute between the 3^rd petitioner and the 3^rd respondent has been amicably settled.

5. The scope and ambit of the inherent powers of this Court to quash criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement between the parties have been authoritatively laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court, inGian Singh v. State of Punjab [ (2012) 10 SCC 303 ],State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others [ (2019) 5 SCC 688 ], Naushey Ali v. State of U.P. [ (2025) 4 SCC 78 ], and in a host of judicial pronouncements. It is held that in cases where the offences are not grave or heinous, and where the parties have amicably settled the dispute, to secure the ends of justice, the High Court may invoke its inherent powers to quash the proceedings, particularly if continuation of the prosecution would serve no fruitful purpose.

6. On an overall consideration of the facts and circumstances of the present case, and the materials on record, I am satisfied that: the offences alleged are not heinous or of a serious nature; no public interest or element of societal concern is involved; the chances of conviction are remote in view of the settlement; and the continuation of the proceedings would merely burden the judicial process without advancing the cause of justice. Furthermore, the settlement would promote harmony between the parties and restore peace. Hence, this Court is persuaded to hold that this is a fit case to exercise its inherent jurisdiction.

In the result, the Crl. M.C. is allowed. Accordingly, Annexure A1 FIR and all further proceedings in Crime No.26 of 2020 of the Mavoor Police Station, as against the