The High Court can quash criminal proceedings based on a compromise between parties, provided it serves the ends of justice and prevents abuse of process.

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner / sole accused to call for the records pertaining to the First Information Report in Crime No.58 of 2025, dated 16.01.2025 for the offences under Sections 296(b) , 109(1) and 351 (3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ), 2023 on the file of the first respondent police and to quash the same.

2. The prosecution case is that on 16.01.2025, when the defacto complainant waiting in the Manur bus stop, the petitioner came to the defacto complainant and demanded money by using filthy language and also threatned the defacto complainant. Hence, the second respondent lodged a complaint and based on the said complaint, FIR has been registered in Crime No.58 of 2025 for the offences under Sections 296(b) , 109(1) and 351(3) of BNS , 2023 and the same is pending on the file of the first repondent police for investigation. At this stage, the petitioner has filed this quash petition.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that during the pendency of the complaint, the matter has been compromised between the parties and the petitioner also tendered apology with the defacto complainant and thereby, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and also filed a compromise memo.

4. The 2nd respondent / defacto complainant also appeared before this Court in person through his counsel and filed a compromise memo dated 19.02.2025. He also expressed his willingness and stated that already matter has been settled between the parties and therefore, he has no objection to allow this petition.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent police would submit that the offences are grave in nature, thereby he strongly opposed to quash the proceedings.

6. At this juncture, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon a judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2014) 6 Supreme Court Cases 466, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down guidelines in respect of the compounding offences in para No.29.1. to 29.7. as follows:-

"29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:

29.1. Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.

29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for qushing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:

(i) ends of justice, or

(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court.

While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives.

29.3. Such a power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc., Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for the offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offence committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender.

29.4. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil cha