After Parties Settle, Uttarakhand HC Quashes Case Alleging Witness Threats And Unlawful Disclosure Of A Sexual-Offence Victim’s Identity

In brief

The question

Whether the criminal proceedings could be quashed under Section 528 BNSS on the basis of the parties’ amicable settlement, notwithstanding the State’s objection that the offences were non-compoundable.

The court held

The Court allowed the compounding application in terms of the parties’ settlement and, exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS, quashed the charge-sheet, summoning order, and entire proceedings in Criminal Case No. 4887 of 2021, insofar as they concerned the applicants.

It also directed

The criminal miscellaneous application was disposed of, as were any pending applications.

01Facts

The applicants sought to quash the charge-sheet dated 21 August 2021, the summoning order dated 27 September 2021, and the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 4887 of 2021, arising from allegations under Sections 195A and 228A IPC.

¶ 2

The proceedings were pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani.

¶ 2

The parties filed a joint compounding application supported by affidavits, stating that they had amicably settled the dispute and that respondent no. 2 did not wish to pursue the case.

¶ 3–7

The applicants appeared in person and respondent no. 2 appeared by video conference; the Court verified their identities and, on interaction, found the settlement voluntary.

¶ 3–7

The State opposed compounding on the ground that the offences were non-compoundable.

¶ 5

02Issues

i.Whether the criminal proceedings could be quashed under Section 528 BNSS on the basis of the parties’ amicable settlement, notwithstanding the State’s objection that the offences were non-compoundable.

¶ 5, 8–10

ii.Whether quashing the proceedings against the applicants would secure the ends of justice in the circumstances of the case.

¶ 8–10

03Law Applied

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, preserves the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction to make orders necessary to secure the ends of justice.

¶ 9

In exercising that jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings on the basis of a settlement, the Court must consider the nature and gravity of the offences, the circumstances in which the dispute arose, and whether quashing would serve the ends of justice.

¶ 9

The Court relied on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466; and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, for these principles.

¶ 9

The offences alleged were under Sections 195A and 228A IPC.

¶ 2

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

04Reasoning

The Court considered the nature of the allegations, the material on record, the circumstances of the dispute, and respondent no. 2’s clear statement that she did not wish to pursue the proceedings.

¶ 6–7

It was satisfied that the settlement was voluntary and free from coercion or undue influence.

¶ 6–7

Applying the principles in the cited Supreme Court decisions, the Court concluded that, in the circumstances, continuing the proceedings would not serve a useful purpose and that quashing them qua the applicants would secure the ends of justice.

¶ 8–10