Introduction
The Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to quash an FIR despite a compromise between the parties. The court held that serious crimes such as abduction, assault, and forced self-incrimination cannot be resolved through private settlements. These acts, it said, fall under heinous offences that affect society at large.
Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia delivered the ruling while hearing a petition related to a case registered under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The FIR included charges under BNS Sections 308(5) (extortion), 127(2) (wrongful confinement), 115(2) (voluntarily causing hurt), 296 (obscene acts), and 3(5) (common intention).
According to the FIR, the complainant was with his friends when the accused approached in a car. They allegedly forced the complainant inside, pretending to want a conversation. When he refused, they drove him away and began threatening him.
Petitioner’s Stance
The accused sought quashing of the FIR, citing that both parties had reached a mutual compromise. They argued that the case had been settled amicably and requested the court to dismiss the charges.
Court’s Ruling
The court refused to accept the argument. It examined the details in the FIR, highlighting the serious nature of the accusations. The complainant was not only abducted from a public space but was also assaulted with the butt of a pistol.
The accused allegedly demanded Rs. 5 lakh. When the complainant claimed he had no money, one co-accused threatened to shoot him. The accused then assaulted him and forced him to transfer Rs. 16,000 via Google Pay.
They also allegedly made the complainant hold a pistol and record a false video confession. In the video, he was made to say he came to kill someone and paid the amount willingly. The accused later threatened to release the video and demanded an additional Rs. 4.84 lakh.
Final Verdict
The High Court held that such acts, abduction, threats, assault, and forced video confessions, are not private disputes. They are serious crimes affecting public safety and cannot be quashed even with a settlement.
Citing Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014), the court stated that heinous offences should not be dismissed based on compromise.
The court dismissed the petition and refused to quash the FIR.
