High Courts may quash non-compoundable matrimonial proceedings after a genuine settlement where no public interest is harmed.

The petitioners sought quashing under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), read with Article 226 of the Constitution, of FIR No. 0250/2022, registered at P.S. Anand Vihar under Sections 498A/306/34 IPC, and the consequential proceedings, on the basis of a settlement.

Petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 had married in 2015 and lived separately from January 2020; they later settled their matrimonial disputes, including for payment of ₹30,00,000, and agreed to cooperate in quashing the FIR.

Respondent no. 2 confirmed that she had received the full settlement amount, had entered the settlement voluntarily, and did not wish to pursue the matter. The parties had also obtained a mutual-consent divorce.

The State raised no serious objection to quashing.

Whether the High Court could quash proceedings for non-compoundable offences under Sections 498A/306/34 IPC on the basis of a voluntary settlement in a matrimonial dispute.

Whether, in the circumstances of this case, quashing the FIR would be appropriate where the complainant had received the settlement amount and did not wish to pursue the matter.

Section 528 BNSS preserves the High Court’s inherent power to quash criminal proceedings; the Court also invoked Article 226 of the Constitution.

Relying on Jitendra Raghuvanshi v. Babita Raghuvanshi, (2013) 4 SCC 58, and the principles in B.S. Joshi, the Court stated that proceedings concerning non-compoundable offences may be quashed where a matrimonial dispute has been genuinely and voluntarily settled, and quashing would secure the ends of justice without adversely affecting an overriding public interest.

The Court found that the parties had resolved their matrimonial disputes through a settlement, that the agreed ₹30,00,000 had been paid in full, and that respondent no. 2 affirmed the settlement was voluntary and that she did not wish to continue the case.

The parties had also obtained a mutual-consent divorce, and the State had no serious objection. Applying the power to quash proceedings in settled matrimonial disputes, the Court concluded that the settlement warranted quashing in the circumstances.

The petition and pending application were disposed of accordingly.