Settlement in criminal proceedings may permit relief from charges if the parties agree amicably, provided the nature of the allegations does not threaten public safety.

2 04-02-2026 At the outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners seeks to withdraw the prayer for bail on behalf of petitioner no.11 submitting that he has been arrested during the pendency of the present bail application. Accordingly, the prayer for bail on behalf of petitioner no.11 stands dismissed as withdrawn.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner nos. 1 to 10, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the informant.

3. The petitioner nos. 1 to 10 apprehend their arrest in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 225 of 2025 registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2)(, 109(1), 303(2), 76, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.

4. As per the allegation made in the FIR, all the accused persons including the petitioners assaulted the informant, his wife and brother causing them injury and also outraged the modesty of the wife of the informant.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that to buy peace of mind, petitioners want to settle the dispute amicably outside the Court in light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Naushey Ali & Ors. Vs.

State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. reported in (2025) 4 SCC 78

6. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the informant submitted that a chance be given to the parties for amicable settlement outside the court.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, on instructions, submitted that the petitioners and the informant have agreed to appear before the learned District Court at 10:30 A.M. on 12.02.2026.

8. Heard the parties

9. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in the FIR, I am of the opinion that an opportunity is required to be given to the parties to settle their score amicably outside the Court.

10. In this regard, I find it apt to take note of the observation made by the Apex Court recently in case of Naushey Ali (supra), in paragraph nos. 11 to 20, which are reproduced hereinafter:

“11. Before we apply this judgment to the facts, it will be worthwhile to recall the observations of Sikri, J. in Narinder Singh (supra):-

"26. Having said so, we would hasten to add that though it is a serious offence as the accused person(s) attempted to take the life of another person/victim, at the same time the court cannot be oblivious to hard realities that many times whenever there is a quarrel between the parties leading to physical commotion and sustaining of injury by either or both the parties, there is a tendency to give it a slant of an offence under Section 307 IPC as well..."

(Emphasis supplied)

12. Coming back to Laxmi Narayan (supra), this Court has held that mere mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge-sheet should not be the basis for adopting a hands-off approach. It has further held that it would be open for the court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or whether there is evidence to back it. It has been held that the courts may go by the nature of injuries sustained; as to whether the injuries are inflicted on the vital/ delicate parts of the body and the nature of weapon used. It has also been clarified that such an exercise would be permissible after investigation and fil