Satish And ORS v. State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi And ORS

$~79 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 784/2025 SATISH AND ORS .....Petitioners Through:

Mr.Maninder Jeet Singh & Mr.Vimal Kumar, Advocates versus STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS .....Respondents Through:

Mr.Rahul Tyagi, ASC Mother of the Victim in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

O R D E R

% 20.08.2025 Crl.M.A. No.7289/2025 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(Crl.) 784/2025 1.

Petitioners herein seek quashing of the FIR No. 332/2024 dated 31.05.2024 under Sections 323/324/341/34 of the IPC registered at P.S. Burari, Delhi, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise between the parties. 2.

The complainant earlier alleged that on 30.05.2024, while she was travelling with her son Karan, they saw 3-4 boys arguing with a rickshaw driver. When they tried to intervene, the boys attacked Karan, slapped the complainant and attacked them with a sharp object. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the complainant/ Respondent no. 2 lodged the present FIR due to some misunderstanding between the parties. The parties have amicably settled the dispute vide settlement deed dated 24.10.2024 without any force, undue influence or W.P.(CRL) 784/2025 Page 1 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

coercion from any side and out of their own will and choice (Annexure P2). He further submits that an affidavit of no objection to the quashing, deposed by respondent no. 2 and 3, has also been placed on record. 3.1 Furthermore, learned counsel submits that Respondent No. 2, being a heart patient with diabetes and blood pressure, does not wish to pursue court proceedings. He further submits that Petitioners No. 1 to 3 have already borne the hospital expenses. Hence, respondents No. 2 and 3 have no grievance against them.

3.2 Learned counsel also submits that if the said proceedings are allowed to be continued, the same shall be wastage of precious time of this Court. 4.

Learned ASC for the State opposes the prayer made by the petitioner in view of the gravity of offence.

5.

I have interacted with the complainant. On a specific query posed by the Court, she submitted that she and her son both were indeed attacked at the relevant time but states that the dispute arose out of an altercation while they were walking past the accused, who were indulging in some public nuisance. On the complainant subjecting to the same, it took an ugly turn and there was cross-fight between her son and the accused person resulting in minor injuries. Both of them now do not want to press any charges against each other as the incident arose out of heated temper from both sides. 6.

The complainant further candidly affirms the factum of arriving at a settlement vide settlement deed dated 24.10.2024 out of her own volition and duress, pressure or coercion from any quarters. 7.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned ASC for State and the complainant present in person and perused the material on record.

W.P.(CRL) 784/2025 Page 2 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

8.

It transpires that the present FIR has been filed due to some misunderstanding between the parties. As per the terms of the settlement, the parties have also agreed that the expenses of the quashing proceeding will be borne out by the Petitioners. At this stage, in light thereof, I am of the opinion that quashing the FIR would rather facilitate the parties in maintaining or restoring cordiality.

9.

Therefore, the proceedings deserve to be quashed in the exercise of the inherent powers of the Court. Reference may be had to the judgement rendered in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303] in this context.

10.

Accordingly, exercising the inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of BNSS, it is therefore deemed appropriate to quash the FIR.

11.

Consequently, the instant petition is allowed. FIR No. 332/2024 dated 31.05.2024 under Sections 323/324/341/34 of the IPC registered at Police Station Burari, Delhi and the criminal proceedings arising there from are hereby quashed, subject to the payment of Rs.1 lakh by the petitioners as a goodwill gesture to the complainant in saving the time of the criminal machinery of the State what would have been otherwise an exercise in futility, in terms of the complainant not pressing the charges against the accused. After the compliance report being filed with the Investigating Officer the FIR shall stand quashed.

12.

All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ARUN MONGA, J AUGUST 20, 2025/SV W.P.(CRL) 784/2025 Page 3 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.