Quashing an FIR on compromise: how the Allahabad High Court applies Gian Singh

The power

Section 528 BNSS (the old Section 482 CrPC), used by the Allahabad High Court for every FIR registered in Ghaziabad.

The test

Is the offence essentially private, and does the settlement make a conviction remote and improbable.

Not available for

Murder, rape, dacoity, offences by public servants in office, and economic offences with a public dimension.

Where to start

Chamber 817, District Court Complex, Raj Nagar District Centre (RDC), Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002. Bring the FIR and the signed settlement.

Why a settled case still needs the High Court

Most of the cases a Ghaziabad family or business wants to close after a settlement are non-compoundable. Cruelty under Section 85 BNS, cheating under Section 318(4) BNS, criminal breach of trust under Section 316 BNS: none of them is in the list under Section 359 BNSS that lets the complainant and the accused compound the offence before the trial court. The Magistrate at RDC cannot close such a case because the parties have made up. Only the High Court can, under its inherent power, and the quashing page explains where that power sits and how a petition from Ghaziabad reaches Allahabad.

The compromise route is different from the other grounds for quashing. The petitioner is not saying the FIR discloses no offence. The petitioner is saying that the dispute was between private parties, that it has been resolved, and that a trial which can only end in acquittal because the complainant will no longer support the case is a waste of the court's time and an abuse of its process.

What Gian Singh decided

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, a three-judge bench settled that the High Court's inherent power and the power to compound are distinct. The court may quash a non-compoundable case on a settlement where the offence is essentially private, civil or commercial in character, or arises out of a matrimonial relationship or family dispute, and where the possibility of conviction is remote and the continuation of the case would cause oppression to the accused. It drew the line at heinous and serious offences such as murder, rape and dacoity, and at offences committed by public servants in their official capacity, which are not private matters whatever the parties say.

Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, added the working guidelines. The court looks at the stage of the case: a settlement reached before the charge sheet or early in the trial carries more weight than one produced after the evidence is in. It looks at the nature of the injury where an attempt to murder is alleged: a Section 109 BNS case (the old Section 307 IPC) is not automatically outside the rule, but the court examines whether the injury and the weapon show a real attempt on life or a label put on a scuffle.

Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641, closed the door that commercial litigants had been pushing at. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the State, offences against a bank or a public body, and cases where the accused has used the settlement to buy off a complaint of serious fraud, are not quashed because the parties have shaken hands. The court must ask whether the offence is a private wrong or a public one dressed as a private dispute.

Which Ghaziabad cases fit

From the chamber's side of the file, the cases that are regularly quashed on compromise at Allahabad are these:

• Matrimonial cases: cruelty under Section 85 BNS, the Dowry Prohibition Act counts that travel with it, and the connected complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, once the spouses have settled, usually through a mutual consent divorce. The 498A settlement article walks through that sequence.
• Commercial disputes filed as cheating and breach of trust: a builder-buyer dispute, an unpaid supply, a partnership that broke up, a cheque given as security, settled by payment or a fresh agreement.
• Neighbourhood and family quarrels: a scuffle over a boundary wall in a GDA colony, an assault count under Section 115 or 117 BNS, criminal intimidation under Section 351 BNS, where the families have made peace.
• Property disputes between relatives after a partition, where the FIR for trespass or forgery was a pressure tactic and the civil matter has been resolved.

The cases that do not fit, however complete the settlement: sexual offences, including those under the POCSO Act; murder and dacoity; cases against public servants for acts in office; offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act; and frauds on a bank, a public body or the investing public. For those the only route is the Bhajan Lal grounds, which turn on what the FIR says rather than on what the parties have since agreed.

The settlement itself

The High Court quashes on a settlement it can see and trust. That means a written compromise, signed by both sides, with the terms set out: what is paid or returned, what cases are withdrawn, what each side undertakes not to do. In a matrimonial case it is the memorandum of understanding that also goes before the Family Court in the Section 13B petition. In a commercial case it is a settlement deed with the payment schedule, and proof that the agreed payments have been made or are secured.

Three things make the court comfortable. First, that the settlement is voluntary, which is why the complainant's own affidavit matters more than the petitioner's. Second, that it is complete: a settlement that leaves one case pending while asking the court to close another invites the question why. Third, that the consideration has actually moved. A petition filed on a promise to pay is weaker than one filed after the payment, and some benches will simply adjourn it until the money is shown to have changed hands.

The complainant's affidavit and appearance

The complainant is made a respondent in the petition and files a counter affidavit, or a short affidavit in support, stating that the dispute has been settled, that the affidavit is sworn without pressure, and that the complainant has no objection to the FIR and the proceedings being quashed. The affidavit is sworn before an oath commissioner at Allahabad or, for a complainant outside India, attested at the Indian mission and placed on record through counsel.

Whether the complainant must appear in person depends on the bench and the case. In matrimonial cases the court frequently wants to see the wife and confirm from her that the settlement is real, and the chamber fixes the date so that she is present. In commercial cases identification through counsel and the affidavit are usually enough. The practical rule is to plan for appearance and be relieved if it is not needed, rather than the reverse. The State, through the Government Advocate, is heard too; it may object where it believes the offence is not a private one, and the court decides.

Costs and conditions

Quashing on compromise is sometimes conditional. The court may direct the petitioner to deposit a sum with the High Court Legal Services Committee or a similar body, reasoning that the criminal justice system was engaged and then disengaged by a private bargain. It may also record the settlement terms in the order so that a breach can be brought back before the court. Tell the client beforehand.

What the petition annexes

• The FIR, the charge sheet if filed, the cognizance order and the summons, with the trial court's order sheet.
• The signed settlement or memorandum of understanding, and proof of performance: bank entries, receipts, the Family Court's order where a mutual consent divorce is part of it.
• The complainant's affidavit of no objection, with identity proof.
• The connected cases, with their status: the maintenance application under Section 144 BNSS, the Domestic Violence Act complaint, the civil suit, the arbitration, so the court sees that everything has been dealt with.
• Where any accused is on bail, the bail order; where any accused was never arrested, any interim protection order.

The documents checklist has the full list for a quashing petition. If the fear in the meantime is arrest, read the stay of arrest article before the petition is filed, because the interim order is argued at the first listing.

How the chamber runs it

The chamber reads the FIR against the Gian Singh and Parbatbhai Aahir line and says at the first meeting whether the case is one the court will close on a settlement. If it is, the settlement is drafted or reviewed so that it covers every proceeding between the parties, the complainant's affidavit is sworn, and the petition is briefed to counsel at Allahabad with the chamber at RDC handling the trial court dates until the order comes. Everything in this article is about the compromise route; the other grounds and the overall procedure are on the FIR quashing page.

Read next

• Quashing a 498A case after settlement: from the Family Court in Ghaziabad to the High Court
• Stay of arrest in a quashing petition: what the High Court grants and when
• FIR quashing for Ghaziabad cases at the Allahabad High Court

Questions people ask