Usha Rani v. The State Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi And ORS.

$~63 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C.

2678/2025, CRL.M.A.

12026/2025 & CRL.M.A.

12027/2025 USHA RANI .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Tariq Muneer, Mr. Achal, Mr.

Chandan Saggu, Mr. Chanchal Gupta, Advocates with Petitioner in person versus THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for the State with SI Sachin Panwar, PS Fatehpur Beri Mr. V.K Pandey, Mr. B.K. Mishra, Mr. Akash, Advocates for R-2 with R-2 in person Respondent No. 3 in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 26.08.2025 1.

The present petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732) seeks quashing of FIR No. 510/2024 dated 5th September, 2024, registered under Sections 448, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18603 at P.S. Fatehpur Beri and all consequential proceedings 1 "BNSS"

2 "CrPC"

3 "IPC"

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

emanating therefrom.

2.

Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution arises from a complaint dated 3rd July, 2023, filed by one Bhupendra Sharma (the Complainant/Respondent No. 2) under Section 156(3) of the CrPC. The said complaint was allowed by the Magistrate by order dated 5th September, 2024, directing registration of the subject FIR. The Complainant alleged that after retiring from the Army, he had purchased a plot of land admeasuring 400 sq. ft. from one Jai Kumar (Respondent No. 3) in January 2023 and was handed over possession thereof upon making the due payment. He further alleged that in June 2023, when he commenced placing construction material for raising a boundary wall over the said land, Usha Rani (the Petitioner) arrived at the site and started quarrelling with him. It is further alleged that the Petitioner forcibly took possession of the land and extended both physical and verbal threats, directing the Complainant to vacate the subject property. On the basis of aforenoted allegations, the impugned FIR was registered.

3.

The parties state that during the pendency of the proceedings, they have clarified their misunderstandings and have amicably resolved their disputes and differences. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, resultantly, have decided not to pursue the impugned FIR against the Petitioner. Pursuant to this settlement, a Settlement Agreement dated 17th October, 2024, has been executed between the parties.

4.

A copy of the Settlement Agreement has been placed on record and perused by the Court. As per its terms, the parties have settled their disputes without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. It is also recorded that Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have voluntarily given their no objection to the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

quashing of the subject FIR.

5.

In view of the settlement, Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, who appear in person and are duly identified by the Investigating Officer, unequivocally state that they do not wish to pursue the FIR proceedings. They confirm that their decision to settle the matter is voluntary and made without any undue influence or coercion. The Petitioner has also joined the proceedings in person and is duly identified by the Investigating Officer. In light of the amicable resolution between the parties, the Petitioner seeks quashing of the subject FIR and all proceedings arising therefrom. 6.

The Court has considered the aforenoted submissions. It is pertinent to note that the offences under Sections 448 and 506 of IPC are compoundable. Thus, the Court, using its inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS (corresponding to Section 482 of CrPC), may pass an appropriate order to secure the ends of justice. 7.

Having regard to the nature of the dispute and the fact that the aggrieved parties have amicably settled the matter, this Court is of the view that continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. In the circumstances, this is a fit case for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, as the continuance of proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law and impede the ends of justice. 8.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 510/2024 dated 5th September, 2024, registered under Sections 448, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at P.S. Fatehpur Beri and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed. 9.

The parties shall remain bound by the terms of settlement. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

10.

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of along with the pending applications.

SANJEEV NARULA, J AUGUST 26, 2025/ab The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.