Criminal proceedings for non-heinous private offences may be quashed following an amicable settlement between parties.

The petitioners moved the High Court to quash the FIR and criminal proceedings in Taljhari P.S. Case No. 49 of 2022, registered for offences under Sections 384, 387, 388, 379, and 504 of the IPC.

At the time of the petition, the investigation was ongoing, and no charge sheet had been submitted.

During the pendency of the matter, the petitioners and the informant (Opposite Party No. 2) filed a joint interlocutory application (I.A. No. 3299 of 2026) supported by affidavits, stating they had reached an amicable settlement and resolved their disputes.

The petitioners contended that the genesis of the occurrence was a private civil dispute and that the continuation of proceedings post-compromise would be an abuse of the process of law.

Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent power under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash criminal proceedings based on a compromise between the parties in a case involving non-compoundable offences.

The court primarily applied Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which saves the inherent power of the High Court to prevent abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice.

It heavily relied on the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Others v. State of Gujarat & Another (2017) 9 SCC 641.

This precedent establishes that while heinous crimes cannot be quashed via compromise, criminal cases having an "overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil flavour" or those arising from private/family disputes may be quashed if the settlement makes the possibility of conviction remote and continuation of the case would cause extreme injustice.

The court examined the nature of the allegations and found that the dispute was essentially private and personal, rather than a heinous offence or a crime of "mental depravity" that impacts public policy.

Following the guidelines in Parbatbhai Aahir, the court noted that the settlement between the offender and the victim rendered the chance of a successful conviction "remote and bleak".

The court reasoned that since the parties had resolved their entire dispute, forcing the petitioners to undergo a trial would result in "great oppression and prejudice".

The court also noted that the State had no objection to the quashing in light of the compromise.

Consequently, the court determined that quashing the proceedings was necessary to prevent the abuse of the legal process and to secure the ends of justice.

The court held that because the dispute was private and a complete settlement had been reached, the continuation of the case would be unfair and contrary to the interests of justice.

I.A. No. 3299 of 2026 was also disposed of accordingly.