The Sikkim High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against two men accused under Section 196(1)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which pertains to promoting enmity between different groups. The decision came after the complainant, the Bharatiya Gorkha Parisangh (Sikkim State Branch), informed the Court that it no longer wished to pursue the matter. Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan held that the ends of justice would be served by quashing the proceedings, notwithstanding the non-compoundable nature of the offence.
Background of the FIR and Petition
The petitioners, Sanjay Kandoi and Manoj Agarwalla, approached the High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking the quashing of a First Information Report registered at the Ranipool Police Station. The FIR invoked Sections 196(1)(a) and 352 of the BNS. The petitioners contended that the FIR failed to disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences and was filed as a counterblast. They further alleged that they had been assaulted and that the police had refused to register their complaint regarding the same incident.
Complainant Withdraws and Parties Compromise
During the pendency of the proceedings, the Bharatiya Gorkha Parisangh (Sikkim State Branch), the organisation that had lodged the complaint, submitted before the Court that it did not intend to pursue the criminal case any further. Subsequently, the parties executed a joint compromise deed, recording their willingness to settle the dispute amicably. The Court also interacted with the parties in person to ascertain the voluntariness of the settlement.
Can Non-Compoundable Offences Be Quashed on Compromise? ?
The High Court held that despite the non-compoundable classification of an offence under Section 196(1)(a) BNS, the Court retains inherent power under Section 528 BNSS to quash proceedings where the ends of justice so require, particularly when the complainant withdraws support and a genuine compromise exists.
Court's Reasoning on Section 196(1)(a) BNS
The Court noted a distinction between the two charged offences. The offence under Section 196(1)(a) BNS is non-compoundable, whereas the offence under Section 352 BNS is compoundable. However, Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan observed that the nature of the offences, the circumstances in which they allegedly occurred, the execution of the joint compromise deed, and the Court's personal interaction with the parties collectively warranted the exercise of the Court's inherent jurisdiction. The bench remarked that justice would be best served if the criminal proceedings emanating from the FIR were quashed.
Provision | Statute | Nature of Offence | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
Section 196(1)(a) | Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 | Promoting enmity between groups (Non-compoundable) | Proceedings Quashed |
Section 352 | Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 | Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace (Compoundable) | Proceedings Quashed |
Operative Order
Invoking its powers under Section 528 BNSS, the High Court quashed the FIR, the charge-sheet, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. The order was passed on October 28, 2026.