A pending civil dispute alone does not justify quashing criminal proceedings alleging specific offences.

Respondent No. 2 complained that the petitioners, his uncles, attempted to prevent use of a four-foot passage and assaulted him on 3 July 2024, threatened him on 4 July 2024, and had been involved in an earlier incident on 29 May 2024.

The complaint alleged that the incidents were captured on CCTV.

After investigation, a charge sheet was filed, and the petitioners sought to quash the criminal proceedings, contending that the dispute over the passage was civil in nature and was already the subject of a pending suit.

Whether the pending civil dispute over the passage, by itself, justified quashing the criminal proceedings.

Whether the specific allegations and investigation material disclosed grounds to quash the proceedings under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

The Court applied Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, concerning the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction.

It held that the existence of a civil dispute does not, by itself, justify quashing criminal proceedings where the complaint contains specific allegations constituting criminal offences.

At the quashing stage, the Court will not appreciate CCTV footage or witness statements; where the grounds raised require evaluation of evidence, they are for the trial court to consider.

The charge sheet alleged offences under Sections 115, 118, 329, 351, 352 and 355 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The Court accepted that a civil suit concerning the passage was pending, but found that the complaint also alleged specific acts of assault and threat on identified dates.

The investigation material was stated to include CCTV material and witness statements.

Whether the petitioners had a right to use the passage was a matter for the civil proceedings and did not, on its own, answer the criminal allegations.

Assessing the footage and witness statements would require appreciation of evidence, which was not appropriate at this stage.

The Court dismissed the criminal petition.

It reserved liberty to the petitioners to raise their defences before the trial court.