Complainant’s Voluntary Settlement Leads P&H HC To Quash Cheating FIR Against Husband-Wife Duo

In brief

The question

1. Whether the High Court could exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash the FIR and consequential proceedings for non-compoundable offences on the basis of a compromise.

The court held

The Court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 0008 dated 16 May 2026 under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station NRI Gurdaspur, together with all subsequent proceedings arising from it, insofar as they concerned the petitioners.

01Facts

The petitioners sought quashing under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, of FIR No. 0008 dated 16 May 2026, registered at Police Station NRI Gurdaspur under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC, and all consequential proceedings, on the basis of a compromise dated 10 September 2026.

¶ 1

The High Court directed the parties to have their statements recorded and called for a report on the compromise and the involvement of any other accused or affected parties.

¶ 2

The CJM reported that the petitioners and complainant had entered into a voluntary compromise without coercion, that no other accused or affected party was involved, and that neither petitioner was a proclaimed offender.

¶ 3

The complainant and the State did not oppose quashing.

¶ 4–5

02Issues

i.1. Whether the High Court could exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash the FIR and consequential proceedings for non-compoundable offences on the basis of a compromise.

¶ 7–8

ii.2. Whether the compromise was voluntary and, in the circumstances, quashing would further the ends of justice.

¶ 3, 8

03Law Applied

The Court relied on Section 528 BNSS and the principles governing the High Court’s inherent power to quash criminal proceedings, discussed with reference to Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Ram Gopal v. State of Madhya Pradesh.

¶ 7

That power is wider than the statutory compounding power under Section 320 CrPC, but must be exercised cautiously.

¶ 7

Proceedings may be quashed where the dispute is predominantly private or civil in character and settlement would serve justice; quashing is generally inappropriate for heinous or serious offences having a substantial impact on society.

¶ 7

The Court must assess the nature of the offence and the circumstances of the compromise, including whether it was voluntary and whether the accused’s conduct warrants relief.

¶ 7

Provisions in the judgment · 6 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 420

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 318 Section 61

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 482 Section 320

04Reasoning

The Court treated the alleged offences as primarily private in nature and found the compromise genuine and voluntary on the basis of the CJM’s report and the parties’ statements.

¶ 3, 8

The complainant and the State both consented to quashing, and the report disclosed no other accused or affected party and no petitioner declared a proclaimed offender.

¶ 3–5

In those circumstances, the Court concluded that ending the proceedings would bring the dispute to a close and advance substantial justice.

¶ 8