Criminal proceedings over a failed marriage proposal may be quashed after a complete pre-charge-sheet settlement.

The petitioner sought quashing under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, of FIR No. 0204/2026, registered under Sections 316(2) and 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

The complainant alleged that, after an engagement, she entered into a sexual relationship with the petitioner on the basis of his promise to marry her.

The parties entered into a settlement on 24 August 2026.

The complainant confirmed that she did not wish to pursue the allegations and that she had received the full settlement amount of ₹3,60,000.

The settlement was reached while the matter was under investigation and before the charge-sheet had been filed.

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

Whether the nature and stage of the proceedings, and the complainant’s decision not to pursue the allegations, made continuation of the prosecution unnecessary despite the offences alleged.

Section 528 BNSS confers inherent power to quash proceedings to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of process.

Under Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, that power is distinct from statutory compounding and must be exercised with due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence; a settlement may justify quashing where the dispute is predominantly private, the possibility of conviction is remote, and continuation would cause injustice.

Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, identifies the timing of settlement as relevant: a settlement reached during investigation, before filing of the charge-sheet, may favour quashing.

The Court considered that the dispute arose from a marriage proposal that did not materialise, the complainant unequivocally stated that she did not wish to pursue the allegations, and the full settlement amount had been paid.

The settlement had been reached during investigation, before the charge-sheet was filed. Applying Gian Singh and Narinder Singh, the Court concluded that the possibility of conviction was remote and bleak and that continuing the proceedings would serve no useful purpose.

The petition was disposed of accordingly.