AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard. ADMIT. Taken up for final disposal by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.
This application filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeks quashing of First Information Report (FIR) No. 337/2026 dated 02.07.2026 registered with Police Station, Patur, Dist. Akola for the offences punishable under Sections 64, 64(2)(m), 74 and 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), on the ground of settlement.
The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under :
i] In the month of June-2025, the daughter of the complainant/non-applicant no.2 was not feeling well. Therefore, the complainant along with her husband met the applicant, who was known as ‘Moulana’. He treated the daughter of the complainant and told the complainant that she also requires certain treatment. It is alleged that during the course of treatment of the daughter and the complainant, the applicant used to touch the complainant inappropriately and asked her to remove her clothes. It is further alleged that the applicant asked the complainant that for betterment of her daughter, she along with her husband and daughter should reside in his house. Accordingly, the complainant and her family went to reside at the house of the applicant, where the applicant committed forcible sexual intercourse with the complainant. Thereafter, on 05.05.2026, the complainant and her husband left the house of the applicant and came to reside at Akola. The applicant then came at Akola and asked the complainant to accompany him at Patur. When the complainant refused to accompany him, he threatened to kill her and her family. Therefore, on this allegations, the complainant lodged a report with the police station on 01.07.2026. On the basis of said report, the FIR came to be registered against the applicant for the aforesaid offences.
Heard Mr. Syed Salman ali, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, Mr. Nikhil Joshi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for non-applicant no.1/State and Mr. Sahil Sheikh, learned counsel appearing for non-applicant no.2.
The complainant appeared through her counsel and filed submissions across the bar along with an envelop containing Solemn Affirmation of the complainant. The said submissions and the envelope are taken on record and marked as “Exh.-”X” and “Y” respectively, for identification. It is stated in the said submissions on affidavit that the matter has been amicably settled between the applicant and the complainant. It is further stated that the FIR came to be lodged due to misunderstanding and in the heat of the moment. According to the complainant, if the prosecution is continued, it will jeopardize her as well as the applicant’s future. It is further contended that the present prosecution arose out of the anger. The complainant and the applicant both are separately married and have families and they have bright future. The complainant does not want to prosecute the applicant and she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed and set aside against the applicant.
The complainant is personally present before the Court today. She is duly identified by her counsel. Upon inquiry with her, she reiterated the contents of the affidavit and submitted that she does not want to continue with the criminal prosecution against the applicant and has no objection if the FIR is quashed and set aside.
With regard to compoundability of the offence, the Supreme Court in the case of Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 has observed in paras 29.1, 29.2, 29.4 and 29.5 as under :
“ 29.1. Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.
29.2.When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure: (i) ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives.
29.4.On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.
29.5.While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases.
A useful reference can be made to the decision in the case of Naushey Ali v. State of Uttar Pradesh, reported at (2025) 4 SCC 78, wherein at paragraph 32 the Supreme Court has observed that proceeding with the trial, when the parties have amicably resolved the dispute, would be futile and the ends of justice require that the settlement be given effect to by quashing the proceedings. It would be a grave abuse of process particularly when the dispute is settled and resolved.
The offence under Section 64 of the BNS alleged against the applicant is a heinous crime. This offence cannot ordinarily be quashed without examining the factual matrix and the material on record. It is only after the Court is satisfied with the peculiar facts and circumstances of such case that the inherent powers of this Court may be exercised to quash the proceedings on the basis of settlement between the parties.
Reliance can be placed on the decision in the case of Madhukar and others Vs. State of Maharashtra and another reported at (2025) SCC Online SC 1415, wherein the Supreme Court while quashing the FIR registered for the offence of rape has observed that the inherent powers of the Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to secure the ends of justice is not constrained by any rigid formula and must be exercised in reference to the facts of each case.
Considering the peculiar facts of the case, there are bleak and rare chances of securing conviction against the applicant. Therefore, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose. It will amount to an abuse of the process of the Court. Therefore, a case is made out for exercising inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS to secure the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. Hence, the following order :-
ORDER
The Criminal Application is allowed.
First Information Report No. 337/2026 dated 02.07.2026 registered with Police Station, Patur, Dist. Akola for the offences punishable under Sections 64, 64(2)(m), 74 and 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is quashed and set aside, subject to the applicant depositing a total cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) in the “Public Welfare Account” maintained with the Union Bank of India, High Court Branch, Nagpur, bearing Account No. 129712010001014 and IFSC Code UBIN0812978, within two weeks from today.
The application stands disposed of in the above terms.