The Uttarakhand High Court reaffirmed that criminal proceedings arising from matrimonial disputes, including those under the Dowry Prohibition Act and Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, may be quashed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, upon mutual settlement of parties and in absence of State opposition. This serves as a binding precedent for lower courts in Uttarakhand and persuasive guidance elsewhere.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name |
C528/1922/2025 of RIZWAN QURESHI Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND CNR UKHC010169532025 |
| Date of Registration | 28-10-2025 |
| Decision Date | 30-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | ALLOWED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA |
| Court | High Court of Uttarakhand |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts in Uttarakhand, persuasive for others |
| Type of Law | Criminal Procedure—Quashing of Proceedings under BNSS |
| Questions of Law | Whether criminal proceedings arising from matrimonial and dowry-related disputes can be quashed under Section 528 BNSS upon settlement? |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that, considering the settlement between the parties and the absence of State opposition, the ends of justice would be met by quashing the ongoing criminal proceedings under Sections 323, 498A, 504, 506 IPC, Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, and Muslim Women (Protection of Rights On Marriage) Act, 2019. Both parties affirmed the settlement was voluntary and free from coercion. The Court allowed the application under Section 528 BNSS and quashed the entire criminal case. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The applicants (husband, his brother, and mother) and the complainant (wife) had matrimonial disputes arising from their marriage of 2016. Proceedings were pending under various penal, dowry, and marriage protection provisions. Both parties settled their disputes out-of-court and jointly sought quashing of the case. The informant/victim supported the application and the State did not oppose. |
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
- Clarifies that proceedings under both general penal and special marriage protection laws can be quashed via mutual settlement under Section 528 BNSS, if not opposed by the State.
- Acknowledges compounding applications and affidavits submitted jointly by the parties as valid basis for quashing.
- The absence of State objection can support discretionary quashing in matrimonial matters involving non-heinous offences.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted that both applicants and informant/victim voluntarily settled their disputes and jointly filed a compounding application and affidavits, stating no coercion was involved.
- The informant/victim expressly requested quashing and State did not object.
- The Court analysed the nature of offences—falling under Sections 323, 498A, 504, 506 IPC, Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, and relevant Muslim Women’s protection law—concluding none were in the category of heinous/serious crimes against society at large.
- The Court exercised inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS to quash proceedings, holding that the “ends of justice would be met” and sustaining the principle of facilitating settlement in private matrimonial disputes where public interest is not undermined.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- The parties have voluntarily settled their disputes arising out of marriage.
- Both sides filed a joint Compounding Application and supporting affidavits without any pressure.
- The informant/victim expressly seeks quashing of proceedings.
- Continuation of proceedings after settlement would not serve justice.
Respondent (State)
- No opposition to the quashing as requested by the informant/victim.
Respondent (Informant/Victim)
- Has resolved all disputes with the applicants.
- Voluntarily supports the application for quashing.
- Filed affidavit confirming the settlement was without coercion or undue influence.
Factual Background
The case arose from matrimonial disputes between the applicant husband and the informant wife, married in November 2016. Allegations led to criminal proceedings against the husband, his brother, and mother, invoking sections 323, 498A, 504, and 506 IPC, Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019. During pendency before the trial court, the parties settled their differences privately and approached the High Court for quashing proceedings based on mutual settlement. The informant/victim supported the application and the State did not object.
Statutory Analysis
- Examined Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 regarding the High Court’s inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings.
- Offences considered: Sections 323, 498A, 504, 506 IPC; Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961; and Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.
- Applied the principle that non-heinous, private matrimonial offences (where public interest is not at stake) may be quashed on settlement, provided parties jointly and voluntarily request, and the State does not object.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment affirms and applies the established law regarding quashing of criminal proceedings in matrimonial disputes upon voluntary settlement.