Non-compoundable matrimonial proceedings may be quashed after voluntary settlement where conviction is remote.

The parties married on 11 December 2020, separated on 16 July 2021, and their child died five months after birth.

The petition sought quashing of FIR No. 0380/2022, registered at P.S. Kishangarh under Sections 498A/406/354/34 IPC; a chargesheet was filed in June 2023.

The parties later executed a settlement MoU on 7 March 2026, and their marriage was dissolved by mutual-consent divorce on 21 May 2026.

Petitioner no. 1 paid the agreed settlement sum of ₹40 lakh to respondent no. 2, who confirmed the settlement and stated that she did not wish to pursue the matter.

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

Whether, in light of the settlement and respondent no. 2’s voluntary confirmation, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve the ends of justice.

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, corresponding to Section 482 CrPC, preserves the High Court’s inherent power to quash criminal proceedings to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of process, including in appropriate cases involving non-compoundable offences; that power is distinct from statutory compounding and must be exercised cautiously with regard to the nature and gravity of the offence.

Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, the Court applied the principles that matrimonial and other predominantly private disputes may be quashed after a complete settlement where the possibility of conviction is remote and continuation would cause injustice, but serious or heinous offences ordinarily cannot be quashed merely because the parties have compromised.

The Court treated the dispute as arising from a matrimonial relationship that had ended in divorce and found that the parties had settled their disputes, with the full ₹40 lakh settlement amount paid.

Respondent no. 2 appeared in person and affirmed that the settlement was voluntary and that she did not wish to continue the case.

Applying the principles in Gian Singh and Narinder Singh, the Court concluded that conviction was unlikely and that continuing the proceedings would be an empty formality and an unnecessary use of judicial resources.

It quashed FIR No. 0380/2022, registered under Sections 498A/406/354/34 IPC at P.S. Kishangarh, and all consequential proceedings; the petition and pending applications were disposed of accordingly.