Criminal proceedings for negligent death may be quashed under Section 528 BNSS following a genuine settlement with the deceased’s legal representatives.

Construction work was being carried out at a property in Sangam Vihar, Delhi, when Gauri Shankar, a worker, came into contact with a nearby transformer and died of electrocution.

FIR No. 312/2025 was registered under Sections 290/106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, corresponding to Sections 288/304A IPC.

At the time of the petition, the investigation was continuing and no charge-sheet had been filed.

The petitioner sought quashing of the FIR on the basis of a comprehensive Settlement Deed dated 10 November 2025 executed with the legal representatives of the deceased worker.

The widow received ₹2,50,000 under the settlement and, during the hearing, the petitioner additionally issued her a cheque for ₹50,000.

Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the FIR concerning offences under Sections 290/106(1) BNS on the basis of an amicable settlement between the accused and the deceased’s legal representatives?

Whether, in view of the voluntary settlement, the consent of the informant and the deceased’s legal representatives, and the payment of compensation, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve any useful purpose?

The Court applied Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which preserves the High Court’s inherent power to pass orders necessary to give effect to the BNSS, prevent abuse of the process of court, or secure the ends of justice.

The Court exercised this power to quash the FIR despite the proceedings arising from offences corresponding to Sections 288/304A IPC, because the parties had voluntarily and comprehensively settled the dispute, the deceased’s legal representatives and the informant had no objection, and continuation of the prosecution would serve no useful purpose.

The Court noted that the settlement was executed with the legal representatives of the deceased worker and that the widow had voluntarily confirmed the settlement, denied coercion or undue influence, and expressed no objection to quashing the FIR.

The informant likewise confirmed that he had no objection and had not suffered any injury in the incident.

The Court also considered the verified particulars of the legal representatives and the petitioner’s financial capacity, as well as the payment of ₹2,50,000 and the additional cheque for ₹50,000.

In these circumstances, the Court concluded that continuation of the criminal proceedings would not advance any useful purpose and that quashing the FIR would secure the ends of justice under Section 528 BNSS.

The Settlement Deed dated 10 November 2025 and the original affidavits were directed to be submitted to the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer within four weeks.

The petition was accordingly disposed of.