Uttarakhand HC Quashes Assault Case Against Applicants After Parties Settle Painting-Work Dispute

In brief

The question

Whether the High Court could quash criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable offences under Section 528 BNSS where the dispute was personal and the parties had amicably settled it.

The court held

The Court allowed the compounding application and the Section 528 BNSS application.

It also directed

It quashed the charge-sheet and the cognizance/summoning order dated 21 December 2019 in Criminal Case No. 149 of 2020, together with the consequential proceedings, qua the applicants, in terms of the parties’ compromise; pending applications were disposed of.

01Facts

The applicants sought to quash the charge-sheet, the cognizance/summoning order dated 21 December 2019, and the criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 149 of 2020, concerning alleged offences under Sections 147, 323, 325, 452, 504 and 506 IPC.

¶ 4–8

The allegations arose from a dispute over painting work; the parties lodged cross-FIRs and both sides sustained injuries, none of which was dangerous to life.

¶ 4–8

The parties later settled the dispute, and respondents 1 to 4 confirmed before the Court that the settlement was voluntary and that they did not wish to pursue the prosecution.

¶ 4–8

The State opposed the application on the ground that some alleged offences were non-compoundable, while not disputing the settlement or the nature of the injuries.

¶ 8

02Issues

i.Whether the High Court could quash criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable offences under Section 528 BNSS where the dispute was personal and the parties had amicably settled it.

¶ 9–12

ii.Whether, in the circumstances of this case, continuation of the proceedings would serve any useful purpose or amount to an abuse of process.

¶ 9, 11–13

03Law Applied

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 preserves the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction, which is distinct from the statutory power to compound offences under Section 320 CrPC; that jurisdiction may be exercised to secure the ends of justice, including by quashing proceedings in an appropriate case involving non-compoundable offences.

¶ 10–12

In 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, the Supreme Court recognised that proceedings arising from essentially private disputes may be quashed after an amicable settlement, subject to consideration of the nature and gravity of the allegations and the circumstances of the case.

¶ 10–12

Provisions in the judgment · 9 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 147 Section 323 Section 325 Section 452 Section 504 Section 506

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 320 Section 482

04Reasoning

The Court found that the dispute arose from a personal altercation over painting work, that both sides sustained injuries, and that the parties had lodged cross-FIRs concerning the same incident.

¶ 6, 9

It accepted the respondents’ confirmation that the settlement was voluntary and that they did not wish to pursue the prosecution.

¶ 7, 9, 13

Given the personal nature of the dispute, the circumstances of the incident, and the parties’ settlement, the Court concluded that continuing the proceedings would serve no useful purpose, notwithstanding that some alleged offences were non-compoundable.

¶ 10–13