Cross-FIRs may be quashed upon settlement in road-rage cases, subject to deterrent costs.

The petitions sought quashing of cross-FIR Nos. 43/2026 and 24/2026, registered at Police Station Sarita Vihar for offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on the basis of a settlement between the parties.

In CRL.M.C. 2296/2026, the petitioner sought impleadment of Amit Chadha, which was allowed and the amended memo of parties was taken on record.

The private parties confirmed before the Court that they had settled their disputes and did not wish to pursue the prosecutions.

The State had no objection to quashing, subject to the imposition of an appropriate deterrent cost, particularly because the matter involved road rage.

Whether the cross-FIRs and the criminal proceedings arising from them could be quashed on the basis of the parties’ compromise?

Whether quashing should be made subject to the petitioners depositing a deterrent cost in view of the road-rage-related violence?

The Court exercised its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings in view of the parties’ voluntary settlement and its satisfaction that continuation of the prosecution would not serve the interests of justice.

The FIRs involved offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The Court further applied the principle that even where proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise, appropriate conditions may be imposed to deter conduct having serious public-safety implications, including road rage.

The Court verified that the private parties had settled all disputes and expressly affirmed that they did not wish to continue the prosecutions.

Having interacted with them in Court, the Court was satisfied that requiring them to undergo a full trial would not advance the interests of justice.

However, because the allegations arose from road rage, which could escalate into dangerous or fatal violence, the Court accepted the State’s request for a deterrent measure.

It therefore balanced the compromise-based relief with a condition requiring each petitioner to deposit costs of Rs. 20,000 online with Bharat Ke Veer.

The petitioners were directed to file the cost receipts before the trial court, where the matter was listed for 30 September 2026.

The Court clarified that if any petitioner failed to deposit the cost or file the receipt, the trial against the defaulting accused would continue.

The accompanying applications were also disposed of.