Proceedings under BNS Sections 74 and 75 may be quashed on compromise where conviction prospects are bleak.

The complainant alleged that, while attending the applicant’s computer class, he grabbed her hand and attempted to molest her.

She lodged an FIR on 30 November 2024 at Police Station Khachrod, District Ujjain, for offences under Sections 74 and 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

The applicant sought quashing of the FIR and consequential proceedings under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), relying on a compromise between the parties. The compromise was verified and recorded as voluntary; investigation was ongoing and the charge-sheet had not yet been filed.

1. Whether the High Court could exercise its inherent power under Section 528 BNSS to quash the FIR for offences under Sections 74 and 75 BNS on the basis of a compromise between the parties

2. Whether, in the circumstances of this case, the compromise and the asserted prospects of conviction justified quashing the proceedings

Section 528 BNSS empowers the High Court to quash criminal proceedings to secure the ends of justice. Under Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, that power may be exercised in appropriate cases involving a genuine settlement, but ordinarily should not be used to terminate prosecutions for heinous or serious offences, including rape, that have a substantial societal impact.

Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT of Delhi permits the Court to consider whether the record contains material sufficient to sustain the charged offence, the stage of proceedings, and whether settlement is likely to restore harmony; an application made before trial may weigh in favour of quashing.

The judgment also relied on authorities recognising that, in assessing serious charges, the Court may consider the evidence and the realistic prospect of conviction rather than relying solely on the offence’s label.

The Court treated the dispute as one between the parties and relied on the verified compromise, the parties’ restored relations, the early stage of the case, and what it considered a remote and bleak possibility of conviction.

It concluded that quashing would promote harmony and avoid the proceedings disrupting the parties’ relationship again. On that basis, it held the case fit for exercise of its power under Section 528 BNSS.

The petition was disposed of accordingly.