Criminal proceedings for compoundable offences may be quashed under Section 528 BNSS after amicable settlement.

The petitioners invoked Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”) seeking quashing of FIR No. 384/2022 dated 28 April 2022, registered at P.S. Nand Nagari, North-East Delhi, under Sections 323/341/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”).

The FIR arose from a quarrel between the parties on 27 April 2022, in which respondent no. 2 and his father sustained injuries.

Respondent no. 2 had lodged the FIR and appeared before the Court in person.

During the proceedings, the parties, who were family members and neighbours, entered into a written settlement/Memorandum of Understanding dated 3 September 2026 with the intervention of family members and respected persons of the society.

Respondent no. 2 stated that he also represented his father, the other injured person, and that neither of them wished to pursue the proceedings.

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS to quash the FIR and consequential proceedings on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties.

2. Whether the settlement could be acted upon where respondent no. 2 represented that he had entered into it on behalf of his father, who was the other injured person.

The Court applied Section 528 of the BNSS, which empowers the High Court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of court.

The Court further noted that the offences under Sections 323, 341, 506 and 34 of the IPC, as invoked in the FIR, were compoundable in nature.

Where parties have voluntarily and bona fide settled a dispute, and the complainant/injured persons do not wish to pursue the criminal proceedings, the High Court may quash the proceedings when continuation would serve no useful purpose and the order would advance peace and harmony.

The Court found that the dispute arose from a personal quarrel between family members and neighbours and did not warrant continuation after the parties had voluntarily resolved their differences through the MoU dated 3 September 2026.

The parties confirmed that the settlement had been entered into freely, without coercion, threat, pressure or undue influence.

Respondent no. 2 appeared personally and expressly stated that he had settled the matter on behalf of his father, the other injured person, who also had no objection to quashing.

Since the offences were compoundable and the injured persons did not wish to pursue the case, the Court concluded that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings and that quashing would promote a peaceful and harmonious relationship between the parties.

The petition was allowed, and FIR No. 384/2022 dated 28 April 2022, registered at P.S. Nand Nagari under Sections 341/506/323/34 of the IPC, together with all consequential proceedings, was quashed.

The petition was accordingly disposed of.