High Court Quashes Non-Heinous SC/ST Act Proceedings Based on Private Settlement and Likelihood of Acquittal

Six petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking to quash criminal proceedings in Latehar (SC/ST) P.S. Case No. 03 of 2026.

The case was registered for offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 351(2), 352, and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, along with Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

While the investigation was ongoing, the petitioners and the informant (Opposite Party No. 2) filed a joint interlocutory application stating they had settled the dispute through the intervention of well-wishers and no longer wished to proceed.

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent power to quash a criminal proceeding involving the SC/ST Act based on a private settlement between the parties.

2. Whether the offences alleged are of such a heinous nature that they preclude quashing despite a compromise.

Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.), which saves the inherent power of the High Court to prevent abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice.

Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Others v. State of Gujarat and Another (2017), which established that while heinous crimes (murder, rape) or offences under special statutes (Corruption Act) cannot be quashed by settlement, cases that are private in nature or have a civil flavour may be quashed if the possibility of conviction is remote and continuation would cause extreme injustice.

The Court observed that the dispute arose from a misunderstanding between the parties and had been settled amicably.

Applying the guidelines from Parbatbhai Aahir, the Court determined that the offences involved were neither "heinous" nor indicative of "mental depravity".

The Court reasoned that since a full settlement had been reached and the informant did not wish to proceed, the chance of a conviction was "remote and bleak".

Consequently, forcing the petitioners to undergo a trial would constitute hardship and an unnecessary burden on the legal process, whereas quashing the proceedings would serve the ends of justice.

The Court allowed the criminal miscellaneous petition and quashed the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Latehar (SC/ST) P.S. Case No. 03 of 2026 against all petitioners.

Interlocutory Application No. 6225 of 2026 was also disposed of in light of the quashing.