Shivam v. The State Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi And ANR.

$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + SHIVAM .....Petitioner Through:

Dr. Suman Tawar, Advocate with petitioner in person.

versus THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP for the State with SI Vikash Fageria, PS - Subzi Mandi.

Mr. Rahil Akhlaque, Advocate for respondent no. 2 with respondent no.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

O R D E R

% 02.09.2025 1.

Petitioner herein seeks quashing of an FIR No. 53/2020 dated 23.02.2020 for the alleged offences under Section 324 of IPC, lodged at Police Station Subzi Mandi, along with all the proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise between the parties. 2.

Complainant alleged that, on his way to dinner, he saw some boys quarrelling. When he tried to intervene and stop the fight, Petitioner allegedly attacked him with a knife and also injured his friend. 3.

In view of the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the rival contentions and perused the case file.

4.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties are related to each other and are members of the same family. He further submits that they have settled their dispute amicably vide settlement agreement dated The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

11.05.2025 which is placed on record (Annexure C). He further submits that an affidavit of no objection to the quashing, deposed by respondent no. 2, has also been placed on record.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, relying on the judgment in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr., (2012) 10 SCC 303, also submits that in view of the settlement, the FIR and all consequential proceedings deserve to be quashed.

6.

The parties are present in person before the Court. Upon interacting with them, it appears that the real dispute has indeed been settled amicably. The complainant has also affirmed, without any coercion or duress, that she no longer wishes to pursue the charges and supports the quashing of the FIR. 7.

Complainant/ Victim is present in person and I have interacted with him. He states that the petitioner is an old friend of his and on the fateful day, they entered into a heated altercation which resulted in the unsavoury incident of both of them getting unnecessary violent and in the cross fight, he suffered a fall which may have caused the injury and not the knife. He submits that in the heat of moment, he did not realize the adverse consequences of levelling the allegations against his friend and subsequently, they have settled their disputes and he does not wish to press any charges.

8.

Further, complainant submits that he regrets having leveled such allegations against his friends. He does not wish to press the same in order to live peacefully in posterity and enjoy the inter se cordiality with each other.

9.

As regards the injury, he submits that they were minor in nature and he has no grievance qua the same so as to continue with the criminal proceedings.

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

10.

In response to a Court query, both the counsel for Respondent No. 2 and the learned APP for the State concur with the factum of the compromise arrived between the parties and convey their no objection to the quashing of the FIR.

11.

It is thus evident that the petitioners and the complainant are well acquainted. They live in the same neighborhood. Due to a misunderstanding, allegations were levelled against the petitioners in the heat of the moment at the time of FIR registration. However, they have since resolved their differences and arrived at a mutual compromise. They now wish to restore cordial relations.

12.

In view of the above, and applying the ratio laid down in Gian Singh (supra), it is deemed just and appropriate to invoke the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS to prevent undue hardship to the parties and promote mutual goodwill and societal harmony. Allowing criminal proceedings to continue would be an abuse of the process of law in the present case.

13.

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. FIR No. 53/2020 dated 23.02.2020, lodged at Police Station Subzi Mandi, and all other consequential proceedings for offences under Section 324 of IPC against the petitioners are hereby quashed.

14.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. ARUN MONGA, J SEPTEMBER 2, 2025 kd The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.