P&H HC Quashes Julana FIR After Victims Settle With Five Accused, Says Other Pending Cases Against Accused Alone Don’t Bar Quashing

In brief

The question

Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the FIR and consequential proceedings on the basis of the parties’ compromise.

The court held

The Court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 108 dated 24 April 2024, under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 427 and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Julana, District Jind, together with all consequential proceedings, qua the petitioners.

It also directed

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, were disposed of.

01Facts

The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 108 dated 24 April 2024, registered at Police Station Julana, District Jind, under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the consequential proceedings, on the basis of a compromise.

p. 1

The complainant and other victims, as well as all five accused, appeared before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jind, and made statements confirming that the settlement was voluntary and free from coercion. The Magistrate reported that the compromise was genuine; no accused had been declared a proclaimed person or offender.

pp. 1–3

The report also disclosed criminal cases pending against some accused. The State did not dispute the compromise.

pp. 3–5

02Issues

i.Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the FIR and consequential proceedings on the basis of the parties’ compromise.

pp. 1, 5–6

ii.Whether the criminal antecedents disclosed in the Magistrate’s report, by themselves, precluded quashing.

p. 5

03Law Applied

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, preserves the High Court’s inherent power to prevent abuse of the process of court and secure the ends of justice.

p. 1

Relying on Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Court applied the principle that criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of a genuine settlement where the dispute is private in nature and quashing would not adversely affect public interest or have wider societal consequences.

p. 5

Criminal antecedents are relevant but cannot, standing alone, determine whether proceedings should be quashed.

p. 5

Provisions in the judgment · 32 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Indian Penal Code, 1860 18 provisions

Section 34 Section 143 Section 148 Section 149 Section 307 Section 308 Section 323 Section 324 Section 325 Section 341 Section 382 Section 395 Section 398 Section 427 Section 452 Section 500 Section 505 Section 506

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 3 Section 115 Section 126 Section 189 Section 351

Arms Act, 1959 Section 3 Section 5 Section 25 Section 27

rajasthan excise act, 1950 Section 16 Section 19 Section 54 Section 58

04Reasoning

The Magistrate’s report confirmed that the complainant, victims and accused had voluntarily settled the dispute, and the State raised no objection.

pp. 2–5

The Court treated the dispute as personal and inter se, with no wider societal ramifications or adverse effect on public interest.

p. 5

Although criminal antecedents had been reported for some accused, the Court held that they were not, by themselves, sufficient to defeat the petition. In these circumstances, it considered continuation of the proceedings futile and an abuse of process.

p. 5