Section 308 IPC proceedings quashed after voluntary settlement where injuries were not life-threatening.

The applicants sought to quash FIR No. 486 of 2018, the charge-sheet, the cognizance and summoning order, and the ensuing Sessions Trial.

The FIR was registered for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 325, 504 and 506 IPC; the charge-sheet was submitted for offences under Sections 308, 323, 325, 504 and 506 IPC.

The parties filed a joint compounding application supported by affidavits, stating that they had amicably settled the dispute and that respondents 2 to 4 did not wish to pursue the proceedings.

The parties appeared by video conference, and the Court verified the settlement.

1. Whether the Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the criminal proceedings in light of the parties’ settlement.

2. Whether continuation of the proceedings, having regard to the nature and circumstances of the incident and the settlement, would serve the ends of justice.

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, confers inherent jurisdiction on the High Court to make orders necessary to secure the ends of justice.

The Court relied on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466; and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, for the principles governing exercise of that jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings following a settlement, including consideration of the circumstances and nature of the case.

The Court found the settlement voluntary and free from coercion, pressure or undue influence, and noted that respondents 2 to 4 unequivocally wished not to pursue the prosecution.

It considered the nature of the allegations and injuries, the parties’ relationship and shared village, and the circumstances in which the incident occurred; the applicants submitted that the incident arose in the heat of the moment and that the injuries, though some were grievous, were not life-threatening.

In those circumstances, the Court concluded that continuing the proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would not advance the ends of justice.

The criminal miscellaneous application was accordingly disposed of.