AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard. ADMIT. Taken up for final disposal forthwith by the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
This application filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeks quashing of First Information Report (FIR) No. 502/2025 dated 15.10.2025 registered with Police Station, Badnera, Dist. Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 352, 351(2), 115(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and consequential proceedings, on the ground of settlement between the parties.
The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under :
i] Applicant no.1 is the husband of non-applicant no.2/ complainant, whereas applicant nos. 2 to 8 are the relatives of applicant no.1. The marriage of the complainant with applicant no.1 was solemnized on 15.04.2019. After marriage, the complainant started cohabiting with applicant no.1 at the matrimonial house, where the other applicants were also residing.
ii] It is alleged that from the very next day of her marriage, the applicants started harassing the complainant on account that they did not get adequate dowry, jewellery and gift articles in the marriage. The parents-in-laws as well as the brothers-in-laws allegedly taunted the complainant stating that her father did not give a car and substantial money to applicant no.1 in the marriage. It is further alleged that at the instigation by the other applicants, applicant no.1 started demanding Rs. 20,00,000/- from the complainant and they used to taunt and harass her for not bringing the said amount. The applicants were allegedly treating the complainant as a maidservant. They also used to beat and threaten the complainant stating that they would make her life miserable
iii] It is further alleged that when the complainant became pregnant, the applicants sent her to her parental home for delivery. However, even after birth of the child, the behaviour of the applicants towards the complainant did not change. Rather, the alleged harassment intensified for non-fulfillment on account of demand of Rs.20,00,000/-. It is alleged that though the father of the complaint paid a sum of Rs.70,000/- to the applicants between the years 2019 and 2020, they continued to harass the complainant physically and mentally and ousted her from the matrimonial house. On the basis of said report, FIR came to be registered against the applicants for the aforesaid offences.
Heard Ms. Himani Kavi, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, Mrs. Deepa Charlewar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for non-applicant no.1/State and Mr. Mohd. Amir Ayyub, learned counsel appearing for non-applicant no.2.
The complainant has appeared through her counsel and has filed an affidavit dated 26.10.2026 across the bar. The affidavit is taken on record and marked as “Exh.-X” for identification. It is stated in the affidavit that the matter has been amicably settled between the applicants and the complainant. It is contended that the complainant and applicant no.1 have voluntarily decided to resume their matrimonial relationship and live together peacefully as husband and wife for the welfare and future of their son. It is contended that the complainant does not want to prosecute the applicants and she has no objection if the FIR in question and the consequent criminal proceedings are quashed and set aside. It is also stated that the settlement is arrived voluntarily, with her free will, without any force, coercion, undue influence, threat, pressure or inducement from anybody.
The complainant is personally present before the Court today. She is duly identified by her counsel. Upon inquiry with her, she has reiterated the facts stated in the joint affidavit. She further states that she does not want to continue with the criminal prosecution against the applicants and has no objection if the FIR in question and the consequent criminal proceedings are 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 para 29.4 as under :
“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.”
Reliance can be placed on the decision in the case of B.S. Joshi and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana and Anr., reported at (2003) 4 SCC 675, wherein with regards to settlement in cases under Section 498-A of the IPC, the Supreme Court in paragraph 14 has observed as under :
“14.There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498-A in the Penal Code, 1860 was to prevent torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498-A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hyper-technical view would be counterproductive and would act against interests of women and against the object for which this provision was added. There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women from settling earlier. That is not the object of Chapter XX-A of the Penal Code, 1860.”
A useful reference can also 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. To secure the ends of justice, the settlement must be given effect to by quashing the proceedings. Continuation of the proceedings would be a grave abuse of the process of Court, particularly when the dispute is settled and resolved.
In the present case, the dispute is private in nature arising out of matrimonial discord between the complainant and applicant no.1. Now, the complainant and applicant no.1 have mutually decided to resume their matrimonial life. Therefore, with a view to maintain cordial relationship with each other and to lead the future life peacefully, the applicants and the complainant have amicably settled their dispute. Continuation of the criminal prosecution against the applicants may be hindrance in their life and may bitter their relationship in future. The offence does not involve any issue affecting the society at large. In these circumstances, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose. Therefore, in my view, this is a fit case for the exercise of inherent powers 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. 2. First Information Report No. 502/2025 dated 15.10.2025 registered with Police Station, Badnera, Dist. Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 352, 351(2), 115(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and consequential proceedings, are quashed and set aside, subject to the applicants depositing a total cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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.