The High Court may exercise inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS to quash criminal proceedings, including those involving non-compoundable offences like Sections 406 and 420 IPC, where the parties have reached a voluntary compromise, the dispute is essentially private, and the continuation of the trial is likely to cause prejudice and be futile.

Prayer in the present petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for quashing of FIR bearing No.198 dated 16.08.2024 under Section(s) 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Nathusarai Chopta, District Sirsa, along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 14.01.2026 (Annexure P-2).

Lawyers are abstaining from work on account of a call from the High Court Bar Association.

Briefly stated, the present FIR was registered on the complaint submitted by Yogesh Kumar son of Balveer, resident of village Jogiwala, District Sirsa. In the complaint, it was alleged that the complainant had completed his M.A. in History and was preparing for competitive examinations. During the year 2017, while studying in Class XII at village Kagdana, he came into contact with one Mahabir, who was employed in the Public Health Department and was residing with his family at the Water Works quarters in the village. Through such acquaintance, the complainant became familiar with Mahabir’s son, namely Sunil. According to the complainant, in August 2023 he again came in contact with Sunil through Instagram and came to know that Sunil was residing in Dubai. It was alleged that Sunil induced the complainant by representing that he had connections with senior officials in Dubai and could arrange well-paying employment for him at minimal expense. Sunil further assured the complainant that similar arrangements could also be made for his friends or relatives. The complainant thereafter discussed the proposal with his friend Puneet son of Balram Kasnia, resident of village Nathusari, who also agreed to travel to Dubai for employment. It was alleged that Sunil represented that an amount of Rs.5 lakhs would be required for sending both of them to Dubai and directed the complainant to coordinate with his father Mahabir and his brother-in-law Mukesh regarding the necessary arrangements. It was further alleged that on 01.10.2023, the complainant’s maternal uncle Vikram, along with Puneet’s father Balram Kasnia and another person, handed over Rs.5 lakhs in cash to Mukesh at village Janana, Rajasthan, towards expenses for arranging employment and travel to Dubai. According to the complainant, Sunil thereafter confirmed receipt of the said amount and assured that both the complainant and Puneet would be called to Dubai within a short period.

The complaint further disclosed that tourist visas and flight tickets for Dubai were subsequently arranged by the accused persons and that the complainant and Puneet travelled to Dubai on 03.10.2023 after additionally arranging Rs.2 lakhs each at the instance of Sunil, who represented that the said amount was required for securing employment there. It was alleged that after reaching Dubai, Sunil received them at the airport, accommodated them in a room and thereafter collected Rs.2 lakhs each from both of them on the pretext of arranging jobs with lucrative salary packages. Initially, Sunil treated them well; however, after a few days, he began misbehaving with them, threatening and assaulting them, while no employment was provided as promised. The complainant further alleged that upon expiry of the tourist visa period, Sunil refused to extend any assistance and ultimately turned them out of the accommodation. Thereafter, the complainant and Puneet approached local authorities on their own for visa related formalities. It was further alleged that due to the harassment and deteriorating circumstances, the complainant was compelled to arrange further money from his family for securing release of his passport and returning to India. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the complainant alleged that the accused persons had dishonestly induced him and his companion to part with substantial amounts of money on the false promise of arranging employment in Dubai and had thereby cheated and defrauded them. Accordingly, a request was m