Genuine settlement may justify quashing non-compoundable proceedings where the dispute is personal and injuries are simple.

The applicants sought, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), to quash the charge-sheet, summoning order and proceedings in Sessions Trial No. 06 of 2025, arising from an FIR alleging offences under Sections 109(1), 352, 3(5) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

The prosecution alleged that the applicants assaulted two persons seated in a car, causing injuries; the applicants submitted that the injuries were simple and that the incident arose from sudden provocation and road rage.

The parties filed a compromise application, and the complainants stated that they did not wish to pursue the proceedings.

1. Whether the High Court could exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash proceedings involving a non-compoundable offence on the basis of a settlement.

2. Whether, considering the nature of the allegations and injuries and the parties’ voluntary settlement, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve any useful purpose.

Section 528 BNSS preserves the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings where the circumstances warrant, including in appropriate cases involving a genuine settlement, notwithstanding that an offence is non-compoundable.

The Court relied on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466; and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, for the principle that settlement-based quashing depends on the nature and gravity of the offence and the circumstances of the particular case.

The Court considered the simple nature of the injuries, the circumstances of the incident, and the personal nature of the dispute.

Having interacted with the complainants, it was satisfied that the settlement was voluntary and free from coercion or undue influence.

In light of those circumstances, it concluded that continuing the proceedings would serve no useful purpose and that quashing was appropriate under Section 528 BNSS, despite the State’s objection that Section 109(1) BNS was non-compoundable.

It also allowed the Section 528 BNSS application and quashed the charge-sheet, summoning order and entire proceedings in Sessions Trial No. 06 of 2025, arising from FIR No. 02 of 2025, qua the applicants.