← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/948/2025

Jaipal Singh & ANR. v. The State (Govt. Of NCT Delhi) & ANR.

2026-03-11Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani3 pages

$~19 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ JAIPAL SINGH & ANR.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Yogendra Kumar Verma and Mr.

Jayesh Kain, Advocates.

Petitioners in-person.

versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC for the State.

SI Divya, P.S.: Patparganj Industrial Area.

R-2 in-person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

O R D E R

% 11.03.2026 By way of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the petitioners and complainant/respondent No. 2, jointly seek quashing of case FIR No.828/2024 dated 05.12.2024 registered under section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ('BNS') and sections 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act, 1959 ('Arms Act') at P.S.: Patparganj Industrial Area, Delhi, on consent. Consequent upon completion of investigation, offences under sections 54/59 of the Arms Act were modified to sections 29/30 of the Arms Act vide charge-sheet dated 10.08.2025.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

2.

The petition is premised on Compromise Deed notarized on 17.03.2025, whereby the petitioners and respondent No.2 have resolved the matter amicably.

3.

The petition is also supported by affidavits of the petitioners and of respondent No. 2, alongwith proof of their IDs. 4.

The contesting parties are present in court. Their credentials have been verified and they have also been identified by their respective counsel.

5.

Considering the nature of the incident, the court has interacted with the respondent No.2 and the petitioners closely, who are well acquainted with each other; and confirm that the case was one of an accidental firing by a licensed weapon, while the parties were driving to attend a wedding. Parties have confirmed that they have now resolved the matter and a Compromise Deed notarized on 17.03.2025 has been signed by them closing all issues amicably. Parties now wish to live in peace and harmony going forward.

6.

Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, learned ASC (Criminal) confirms that the State has no objection to the subject FIR being quashed. 7.

In the circumstances, in line with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2012) 10 SCC 303 as also in Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466, this court sees no reason why the subject FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom should not be quashed. This court is of the view that in light of the settlement between the contesting parties, continuing with the subject FIR and all The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

subsequent proceedings would be an exercise in futility and would not be conducive to peace and harmony between the parties. 8.

Accordingly, case FIR No. 828/2024 dated 05.12.2024 registered under section 109(1) of the BNS and sections 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act, at P.S.: Patparganj Industrial Area, Delhi is quashed. All proceedings arising therefrom also stand closed. 9.

Petition stands disposed-of.

10.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J MARCH 11, 2026/ak The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.