After Man And Informant Settle ‘Petty Private Dispute,’ Jharkhand HC Quashes Ranchi Criminal Case Against Him

The petitioner sought to quash the FIR and criminal proceedings in Sukhdeo Nagar P.S. Case No. 238 of 2026, registered under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 351(2), 352, 118(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and pending before the Judicial Magistrate-XXXI, Ranchi

While the investigation was ongoing and no charge-sheet had been filed, the petitioner and the informant/opposite party No. 2 filed a joint application supported by affidavits stating that they had settled their dispute and that the informant did not wish to pursue the case

The State raised no serious objection to quashing in light of the settlement

Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, preserves the High Court’s inherent power to make orders necessary to prevent abuse of the process of a court or to secure the ends of justice

Relying on Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, which considered the principles in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court stated that quashing on settlement is distinct from statutory compounding and depends on the facts of each case. The High Court must consider the nature and gravity of the offence and the impact on society; serious or heinous offences generally cannot be quashed merely because the parties have settled. By contrast, where a dispute is predominantly private, the settlement is complete, and the prospect of conviction is remote, quashing may be appropriate to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice

The Court found that the offences involved were not heinous and did not involve serious mental depravity; rather, the case concerned a petty private dispute

Given the complete settlement and the informant’s decision not to proceed, the Court considered the possibility of conviction remote and bleak. It concluded that continuing the prosecution would cause oppression and prejudice to the petitioner and that quashing was consistent with the principles governing the exercise of inherent jurisdiction

The interlocutory application was disposed of accordingly