Can Offences Under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Be Quashed on Compromise? High Court Reaffirms Voluntary Settlement as Valid Ground for Quashing FIRs

LawSikho
November 2, 2025
Category: High Court of Uttarakhand

The Court holds that FIRs under Sections 115(2), 140(1), 351(2), and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, may be quashed when parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, reaffirming the discretionary power to compound such offences even over the State’s opposition. Serves as a binding authority within Uttarakhand on the compounding of specified offences based on compromise.

Summary

Category	Data
Case Name	WPCRL/1304/2025 of ANSH PRATAP RAJPOOT AND ORS Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
CNR	UKHC010166692025
Date of Registration	16-10-2025
Decision Date	30-10-2025
Disposal Nature	DISPOSED
Judgment Author	HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHISH NAITHANI
Court	High Court of Uttarakhand
Bench	Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J.
Precedent Value	Binding authority within Uttarakhand
Type of Law	Criminal Law; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Questions of Law	Whether offences under Sections 115(2), 140(1), 351(2), and 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, can be quashed based on compromise between parties, notwithstanding State opposition.
Ratio Decidendi	The High Court found that where parties have amicably settled their differences in a voluntary and genuine manner, and the nature of offences alleged does not affect society at large, the FIR may be quashed on the basis of the compromise, even over opposition by the State. The parties’ statements were found voluntary, without duress or coercion. The decision reaffirms the Court’s discretionary powers to accept compromise and quash criminal proceedings in suitable cases under the new penal code.
Facts as Summarised by the Court	Petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 0349 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 140(1), 351(2), and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at PS Jaspur, Udham Singh Nagar, on basis of compromise with Respondent No. 3. Both parties presented compromise, supported by affidavits. The State opposed the compounding application. The Court found the settlement genuine and voluntary after in-person interaction.

Practical Impact

Category	Impact
Binding On	All subordinate courts in Uttarakhand
Persuasive For	Other High Courts and courts considering quashing/compounding under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note

Reaffirms that even under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, FIRs can be quashed based on a genuine, voluntary settlement between parties, at the High Court’s discretion.
The presence and voluntary confirmation of both sides before the Court is critical in assessing the genuineness of the compromise.
The State’s opposition does not preclude the Court from quashing FIRs if it is satisfied that justice and the interests of parties are served.
Lawyers may cite this judgment when seeking quashing of criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Summary of Legal Reasoning

The Court observed that the application for compounding was supported by both parties and their counsel, with affidavits establishing voluntariness and the absence of coercion.
All parties appeared in person; after due interaction, the compromise was found genuine.
The Court considered the nature of the offences, noting that none were of a type to affect society at large, and that the dispute was essentially private between individuals.
The discretionary jurisdiction to quash proceedings, even over opposition by the State, was exercised where settlement would serve the ends of justice.
The FIR and proceedings were thus quashed strictly as per the terms of the compromise, and the writ petition was disposed accordingly.

Arguments by the Parties

Petitioner

Sought quashing of the FIR based on a compromise reached with the complainant (Respondent No. 3).
Asserted that parties had amicably and voluntarily settled their differences.
Application for compounding was supported by affidavits of both sides.

State

Opposed the compounding application, arguing against quashing the FIR.

Respondent No. 3 (Complainant)

Appeared in person and supported the application for quashing.
Confirmed that the compromise was genuine and without duress.

Factual Background

The dispute arose between the petitioners and Respondent No. 3, leading to the registration of FIR No. 0349 of 2025 at Police Station Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar, under Sections 115(2), 140(1), 351(2), and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During the pendency of proceedings, the parties reached a voluntary settlement and jointly moved an application for compounding the offences. The compromise was presented with supporting affidavits and was scrutinized by the Court in the presence of all parties.

Statutory Analysis

The Court dealt with Sections 115(2), 140(1), 351(2), and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, examining whether prosecutions under these sections can be quashed based on a voluntary compromise. The analysis hinges on the discretionary powers of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, particularly in the context of compounding non-society impacting offences between private parties.

Alert Indicators

✔ Precedent Followed – The Court reaffirmed existing discretionary powers to quash criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise where justice so requires, applying the principle to offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.