Verified compromise and co-accused acquittals, cumulatively, justified quashing proceedings against the remaining accused.

Respondent No. 1’s complaint led to registration of Crime No. 356/2022 at Police Station Lordganj, Jabalpur, for offences under Sections 420, 120-B, 467 and 468 of the IPC and Section 4-A of the Gambling Act.

The applicants were added as accused through supplementary charge-sheets.

Thirteen of the fifteen accused in the same prosecution had been acquitted by the trial court; the State had not placed on record that those acquittals had been appealed.

The complainant had testified at trial and, according to the applicants, had not supported the prosecution; he later entered into a compromise with them, which the Registrar verified as voluntary.

The applicants sought quashing under Section 528 of the BNSS.

The State opposed, alleging organized gambling, applicants’ involvement, and a wider societal impact.

Whether, in light of the complainant’s verified compromise and the course of the prosecution—including the acquittal of thirteen co-accused—the criminal proceedings against the applicants should be quashed under Section 528 of the BNSS.

Whether the allegations of organized gambling and their asserted societal ramifications precluded quashing on the facts of this case.

Section 528 of the BNSS preserves the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of the process of court and secure the ends of justice; that jurisdiction does not ordinarily permit the Court to assess evidence or decide disputed facts, but may be exercised where subsequent circumstances or material of unimpeachable character warrant it.

Applying Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1947, with reference to Rajiv Thapar v. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330, the Court stated that quashing may be appropriate where the relied-on material is sterling and indubitable, completely rules out the prosecution’s factual assertions, is unrefuted or incapable of justifiable refutation, and continuation would constitute an abuse of process and fail to serve the ends of justice.

A private compromise is not, by itself, sufficient to terminate proceedings involving allegations with societal impact; the Court must assess the cumulative facts and circumstances.

The Court treated the earlier dismissal of nine petitions as non-determinative because those proceedings concerned different crimes and trials.

It considered the acquittal of thirteen co-accused in the same prosecution, the complainant’s failure to support the prosecution at trial as submitted by the applicants, and his subsequent voluntarily verified compromise together, rather than treating settlement as the sole ground for quashing.

Although the State alleged organized gambling and wider societal consequences, the Court concluded that, on this prosecution’s particular record, conviction of the remaining applicants appeared highly improbable and continuation would serve no meaningful purpose.

It found the four requirements identified in Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani satisfied.

It allowed the petition under Section 528 of the BNSS and quashed the proceedings arising from Crime No. 356/2022, including consequential proceedings, insofar as they related to the applicants.

The order was expressly confined to these applicants and this prosecution.