JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. T. Taggu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. L. Hage, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the state respondent. 2. The present criminal petition has been instituted, praying for quashing of the F.I.R., dated 09.01.2021, lodged before the Police of the Itanagar Police Station, leading to registration of Itanagar Police Station Case No. 8/2021, under Sections 489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 3. The brief facts requisite for adjudication of the issues arising in the present proceeding is noticed as under. Shri Tarh Tagung, the petitioner No. 2 herein, had lodged an F.I.R. on 07.01.2021, inter alia alleging that the petitioner No. 1 herein, was caught with fake notes (Rs. 500 notes) while purchasing a packet of cigarette from his shop (Gumti), situated near Dokum Baptist Church at around 9 P.M. On receipt of the said F.I.R., the Police of Itanagar Police Station registered Itanagar Police Station Case No. 08/2021, under Sections 489B/489C of the IPC. The investigation in connection with the said case is presently underway. The materials brought on record reveal that during the course of investigation, the Police had recovered another 5 (five) numbers of fake currency notes, all of denomination Rs. 500 from the vehicle of the petitioner No. 1, herein. It is also revealed that further 4 (four) persons were arrested and one of the persons who was arrested was the wife of the petitioner No. 1. The petitioners have instituted the present proceeding by contending that the informant, in Itanagar Police Station Case No. 08/2021, Shri Tarh Tagung, the petitioner No. 2 herein, had entered into a settlement agreement with the petitioner No. 1 and had resolved to settle their differences and the resolution of the differences was reduced to writing in the form of a settlement agreement, dated 06.07.2024, executed by the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No. 2, i.e. the accused and the informant in Itanagar Police Station Case No. 08/2021. In terms of the said agreement, as reached between the petitioners herein, it was resolved that they would take steps for quashing of the FIR lodged against the petitioner No. 1 by the petitioner No. 2. In terms of the said agreement, as reached between the petitioners herein, it was resolved that they would take steps for quashing of the FIR lodged against the petitioner No. 1 by the petitioner No. 2. The petitioner No. 1, relying on the said settlement agreement and an affidavit sworn by the petitioner No. 2, wherein, he had undertaken that he would not raise any further grievance against the petitioner No. 1, has prayed for quashing of the proceedings in the Itanagar Police Station Case No. 08/2021. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the issues arising in the matter between the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No. 2, having been resolved and such resolution also having been reduced in writing in the form of a settlement agreement, dated 06.07.2024, this Court would be pleased to exercise its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Samhita(BNSS), 2023, to quash the proceedings in Itanagar Police Station Case No. 08/2021. 5. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and also produced the materials available on record. 6. While it is a settled position of law that this Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, is empowered, in a given case, to quash the criminal proceedings involved, however, such power is circumscribed and is to be so invoked with the sole purpose to prevent abuse of the process of Court and otherwise, to secure the ends of justice. 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh V. State of Punjab and Anr. , reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 , had categorically held that before exercise of the power for quashing of criminal proceedings, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. It was further held that such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on the society. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. It was further held that such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on the society. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also laid down that any compromise between the victim and the offender in relation to offences under special statutes like the Prevention of Corruption Act or offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity cannot provide for any basis for formal quashing of criminal proceedings involving such offences. 8. In the present case, it is clear that the petitioner No. 1 has been charged under the provisions of Section 489B & 489C of the IPC and he was found involved in circulation of counterfeit notes. The offence alleged against the petitioner No. 1 is actually an offence committed by him against the society at large and not only against the petitioner No. 2, who was the informant in the connected Police Case. Section 489B of the IPC mandates that a person who is involved in counterfeiting currency-note or bank-note shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 (ten) years, and shall also be liable to fine. Section 489C of the IPC also mandates that anybody in possession of any forged or counterfeit currency-note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 7 (seven) years, or with fine, or with both. 9. The offence alleged against the petitioner No. 1 herein, is of a serious nature, which has a bearing on the society and accordingly, the offence cannot be termed to be one having an overwhelming and predominantly civil flavour, which would permit this Court to invoke its power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, to quash the criminal proceedings. 10. The offence alleged against the petitioner No. 1 herein, is of a serious nature, which has a bearing on the society and accordingly, the offence cannot be termed to be one having an overwhelming and predominantly civil flavour, which would permit this Court to invoke its power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, to quash the criminal proceedings. 10. Given the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner No. 1 in the matter, this Court is of the considered view that quashing of the criminal proceedings so instituted against him would have the effect of affecting the administration of criminal justice system. Accordingly, the amicable settlement of the dispute between the informant and the accused in Itanagar Police Station Case No. 08/2021, under Sections 489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), i.e. the petitioners herein, would have no bearing and the same cannot be reckoned for the purpose of quashing the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner No. 1. 11. In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the considered view that the prayer made in the present Criminal Petition for quashing of the proceedings in Itanagar Police Station Case No. 08/2021, under Sections 489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) would not mandate an acceptance and accordingly, the present Criminal Petition is held to be devoid of any merit. 12. Consequently, the Criminal Petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to cost.