The Uttarakhand High Court reaffirmed that even for non-compoundable offences, criminal proceedings can be quashed if the underlying dispute is private and both complainant and accused agree to settlement. The Court upheld the prevailing precedent, confirming the discretionary power under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. This decision serves as binding authority within Uttarakhand, particularly pertinent to cases involving financial transactions erroneously criminalised due to misunderstandings.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | C528/1744/2025 of SHERU SINGH AND ORS Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND |
| CNR | UKHC010153952025 |
| Date of Registration | 25-09-2025 |
| Decision Date | 31-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA |
| Court | High Court of Uttarakhand |
| Precedent Value | Binding within Uttarakhand; persuasive for other jurisdictions |
| Type of Law | Criminal Law — Quashing proceedings, application of Section 528 BNSS, 2023 |
| Questions of Law | Whether criminal proceedings in non-compoundable offences may be quashed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 when the underlying dispute is private and parties have settled? |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that, in the facts of the present case, where the underlying financial transaction was a private dispute and both informant and accused concurred there was an error, the criminal proceedings under non-compoundable offences could be quashed. The Court considered the nature of the transaction, the absence of societal impact, and mutual agreement to settle. It exercised discretion under Section 528 BNSS, 2023, to quash the proceedings in the interests of justice. Objection by the State that offences were non-compoundable was not found decisive. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
Informant had an account in SBI and Rs. 54,999.99 was withdrawn. FIR registered 29.05.2025, charge-sheet against seven persons. Informant later clarified amount was for a tours and travel package, deposited voluntarily due to misunderstanding, and sought quashing. State opposed on non-compoundable grounds. Court quashed proceedings for accused applicants. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Uttarakhand |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts, Supreme Court |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Uttarakhand High Court reaffirmed that proceedings for non-compoundable offences can be quashed when the real dispute is civil or private in nature and settled by the parties.
- The objection from State regarding non-compoundability is not by itself decisive; the private nature and settlement are key.
- Lawyers handling financial transaction disputes criminalised mistakenly can cite this decision for quashing proceedings.
- Application of Section 528 BNSS, 2023 clarified in context of private, settled disputes.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted the factual clarification from the informant that the disputed sum was voluntarily transferred via UPI as part of a tours and travel package transaction with a co-accused and that the FIR was lodged due to a misunderstanding.
- Both accused and informant jointly requested quashing, recognising the private nature of the transaction.
- The State opposed the application solely on the ground that the offences charged were non-compoundable.
- The Court reasoned that, given the absence of societal impact and the voluntary settlement, ends of justice would be served by quashing the proceedings.
- The provisions of Section 528 BNSS, 2023 were invoked to exercise inherent powers to quash the criminal proceedings in such circumstances.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- Contended the dispute was private in nature, arising out of a financial transaction (tours and travel package).
- Money was voluntarily transferred by the informant’s UPI.
- FIR was lodged under a mistaken belief; matter has since been clarified and settled.
- Requested quashing of all proceedings.
Respondent No. 1 (State):
- Opposed quashing on the ground that the offences are non-compoundable.
Respondent No. 2 (Informant-Victim):
- Supported the application, confirmed the transaction was voluntary, and requested quashing.
Factual Background
The informant had a bank account in State Bank of India from which Rs.54,999.99 was withdrawn by unknown persons, reportedly leading to an FIR being lodged on 29.05.2025. A chargesheet was filed against seven persons, including the applicants. Subsequently, the informant clarified that the amount was actually paid via UPI for a tours and travel package to a co-accused, Manoj Saini, and the FIR had been filed due to a mistake. Both the informant and applicants requested the quashing of proceedings; the State opposed on the ground that offences were non-compoundable.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to inherent powers for quashing criminal proceedings), was invoked and interpreted as enabling quashing even in non-compoundable offences when dispute is private in nature and parties have settled.
- No explicit mention of constitutional provisions or reading down/up.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions are recorded in the judgment.
Procedural Innovations
No new procedural precedents or innovations are recorded in the judgment.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment follows and applies existing legal principles regarding quashing proceedings in settled, private disputes even where offences are non-compoundable.