After Parties Settle Private Dispute, Jharkhand HC Quashes Attempt-To-Murder FIR Before Chargesheet

The petitioners sought to quash Chandil (Kapali OP) P.S. Case No. 181 of 2025, registered under Sections 126(2), 303(2), 115(2), 109, 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The investigation was ongoing and no charge-sheet had been filed.

The parties stated that they had settled their dispute, which arose from a free fight; a counter-case had also been lodged by petitioner no. 1.

The informant supported quashing, and the State had no objection.

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 preserves the High Court’s inherent power to quash criminal proceedings to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of process; that power is distinct from statutory compounding and may extend to non-compoundable offences, but must be exercised sparingly.

Applying Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the offence, whether the dispute was predominantly private or civil, the likelihood of conviction, prejudice from continuing the case, and the stage of proceedings.

Serious offences are not ordinarily quashed merely because of a compromise, though the Court may assess whether the serious charge is supported by the material and whether conviction is likely.

The Court accepted that the dispute was predominantly of a civil character and had been settled, with the informant no longer wishing to proceed.

It also noted that the investigation remained ongoing and the charge-sheet had not been filed—a stage at which Narinder Singh permits a more liberal approach to settlement-based quashing.

In these circumstances, the Court considered the possibility of conviction remote and found that continuing the case would cause oppression and prejudice and amount to an abuse of process.

The interlocutory application was disposed of accordingly.