Jaspreet Kaur & ORS. v. State NCT Of Delhi And ANR

$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4638/2025 and CRL.M.A. 20168/2025 JASPREET KAUR & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Sudhir Vats and Mr. Naveen Kumar, Advocates along with petitioners in person.

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through:

Ms. Richa Dhawan, APP for the State.

Mr. Tarun Kr. Makhija, Ms. Manisha and Ms. Muskan, Advocates for respondent no. 2 with respondent no.

2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

O R D E R

% 10.09.2025 1.

Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No. WD-KH-000236 dated 12.05.2022 for the alleged offence under Section 379 of IPC registered at Police Station Khyala, West District and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the compromise arrived between the parties. 2.

Petitioner no. 1 is the daughter-in-law of complainant/ Respondent No. 2. Petitioner no. 2 (Father) and petitioner no. 3 (brother-in-law) are the family members of petitioner no. 1.

3.

Per FIR, the complainant alleged that petitioner no. 2 broke open a cupboard and stole her jewellery worth about 9-10 lakh rupees along with important documents, including property papers. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have amicably settled their disputes vide a Settlement Deed dated 23.04.2025 before Counselling cell, Tis Hazari Courts which is placed on record (Annexure-P-3).

5.

Both the counsel for respondent and the learned APP for the State concur with the factum of the compromise between the parties and convey their no objection to the quashing of the FIR. 6.

In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard learned counsels for the parties, as well as perused the material available on record. 7.

The parties are present in the Court and have been identified by their respective counsel and the concerned Investigating Officer. On a Court query, the complainant candidly submits that she is regretful that, at the relevant time, she had levelled certain allegations without knowing the consequences thereof and without realizing which penal provisions would be invoked by the police officials while registering the FIR. 8.

Having perused the FIR and the case file, it is debatable whether the ingredients of the alleged offences, as per the penal sections invoked in the FIR and even otherwise, are not made out.

9.

Given that the dispute between the family members has been resolved, continuing with criminal proceedings may serve no useful purpose. It would be a drain on judicial resources and abuse of the process of law, especially when dispute does not involve any public interest or interest of the society at large. Continuation of the proceedings, on the other hand, may result in hostility between the parties and defeat the very purpose of the settlement.

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

10.

Taking a wholesome view, and in order to let the parties to enter mutual cordiality and family bonhomie which will go a long way in establishing peace rather than promoting hostility in case further proceedings continue, this is a fit case to exercise inherent power under528 of BNSS in quashing the FIR in question.Reference may be had to the judgement rendered in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303] in this context.

11.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. FIR No. WD-KH000236 dated 12.05.2022 for the alleged offence under Section 379 of IPC lodged at Police Station Khyala, West District and all other consequential proceedings, against the petitioner is hereby quashed. 12.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ARUN MONGA, J SEPTEMBER 10, 2025 kd The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.