### Quashing of Criminal Proceedings Under BNSS Allowed Based on Private Settlement for Non-Heinous Offences

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking to quash the proceedings in Telaiya P.S. Case No. 384 of 2025.

The case was registered for various offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, including Sections 352, 351(2), 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 308(5), and 3(5).

During the pendency of the case, the petitioner and the informant (Opposite Party No. 2) entered into a compromise, supported by affidavits from the fathers of both parties in I.A. No. 3089 of 2026, stating that the dispute was settled and the informant had no further grievances.

Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, to quash a criminal proceeding based on a private compromise between the parties.

The court primarily applied Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 (analogous to Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.), which saves the inherent power of the High Court to prevent abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice.

It relied on the landmark precedent *Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Others vs. State of Gujarat & Another* (2017) 9 SCC 641, which established that while heinous crimes cannot be quashed via settlement, the High Court may quash proceedings of a private or civil nature if the compromise renders the possibility of conviction remote and continuation would cause extreme injustice.

The court observed that the dispute between the parties was essentially private in nature and did not involve any matter of public policy.

Upon reviewing the records, the court determined that the offences charged were not "heinous" nor did they involve "mental depravity," but were instead a "petty private dispute."

Following the guidelines in *Parbatbhai Aahir*, the court reasoned that since a complete settlement had been reached, the likelihood of conviction was now "remote and bleak."

Consequently, forcing the petitioner to face trial would constitute "oppression and prejudice," amounting to an abuse of the judicial process.

The State also expressed no objection to the quashing in light of the settlement.

It held that quashing the proceedings was necessary to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of process.

The court ordered the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in Telaiya P.S. Case No. 384 of 2025 pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma.

I.A. No. 3089 of 2026 was also disposed of accordingly.