Proceedings under Section 69 BNS may be quashed on compromise after the parties marry.

The prosecutrix/respondent no. 2 was residing in Indore and came into contact with the petitioner through Instagram. The petitioner proposed marriage and suggested that they live together to understand each other better. They thereafter resided together, and the petitioner allegedly established physical relations with the prosecutrix from November 2025 to March 2026. He allegedly left the shared residence on 30 March 2026 and blocked her contact.

The prosecutrix subsequently lodged FIR Crime No. 767/2026 on 18 May 2026 at Police Station Lasudiya, Indore, for an offence under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).

The petitioner filed a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), seeking quashing of the FIR, charge-sheet, and consequential proceedings.

During the proceedings, the parties reported that they had settled their dispute and had married each other. Their compromise was verified before the Principal Registrar on 1 July 2026 and was taken on record.

Whether the High Court could exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS to quash the FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings for an offence under Section 69 of the BNS on the basis of a compromise between the parties and their subsequent marriage?

Whether continuation of the criminal proceedings, in light of the verified settlement and marriage between the parties, would serve any useful purpose or would defeat the ends of justice?

The Court applied Section 528 of the BNSS, which preserves the High Court’s inherent power to prevent abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice.

It distinguished statutory compounding under Section 359 of the BNSS from quashing in exercise of inherent jurisdiction, relying principally on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303.

Under Gian Singh, quashing on the basis of settlement is distinct from compounding under Section 320 of the CrPC/Section 359 of the BNSS; the High Court may quash proceedings involving non-compoundable offences where the dispute is predominantly personal or matrimonial, the settlement is genuine, and continuation of the prosecution would be futile or would defeat the ends of justice.

However, settlement ordinarily cannot justify quashing serious offences such as murder, rape, dacoity, or offences involving mental depravity, moral turpitude, or public servants acting in that capacity.

The Court accepted that the parties’ compromise had been verified before the Principal Registrar and that they had married each other.

Applying the principle in Gian Singh, the Court treated the dispute as one arising from a personal relationship and concluded that, in view of the parties’ marriage and settlement, continuation of the prosecution would serve no useful purpose.

The Court therefore considered that allowing the criminal proceedings to continue would not advance the interests of justice, whereas quashing them would secure the ends of justice.

It allowed the petition and quashed FIR Crime No. 767/2026 dated 18 May 2026, registered at Police Station Lasudiya, Indore, for the offence under Section 69 of the BNS, along with all subsequent proceedings arising from that crime number and pending against the petitioner.

The petition was accordingly disposed of on the terms of the compromise.