Vishvash Kalirawan & ORS. v. The State Nctof Delhi And ORS

$~62 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2172/2025 & CRL.M.A. 20257/2025 VISHVASH KALIRAWAN & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate with Petitioners in person.

versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS .....Respondents Through:

Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel with SI Satish Kumar, PS Model Town.

Mr. Abhinav Kumar and Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advocates.

Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sharma, Advocate for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

O R D E R

% 23.09.2025 1.

Petitioners herein seek quashing of an FIR No. 0691/2024, dated 28.11.2024, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2) [Voluntarily causing hurt], 333 [House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint], 351(3) [Criminal intimidation], 3(5) [Common intention] of the BNS, registered at P.S. Model Town, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise. 2.

When the respondent no.2/ complainant and respondent no. 3 visited Vikas Malik's flat, the petitioners, who are known to the respondents as they reside in the same locality, allegedly assaulted the complainant/ respondent no.2, causing him injuries and resulting in the registration of the present FIR.

W.P.(CRL) 2172/2025 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.

3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have now amicably settled the dispute to maintain cordial relations vide MOU/ Compromise Deed dated 21.06.2025, appended as Annexure P-2. Learned counsel further submits that the affidavit to the effect of no objection to quashing deposed by the complainant is also placed on record. 4.

Learned counsel for the respondents and the learned SC for the State concur with the factum of the compromise between the parties and convey their no objection to the quashing of the FIR. 5.

In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard learned counsels for the parties, as well as perused the material available on record. 6.

The parties are present in Court, and I have interacted with them. On a Court query put to the respondents, they submit that they have entered into the compromise on their own volition without any duress or coercion. They submit that a heated altercation between the parties resulted in an unsavoury incident and a cross fight and the complainant now regrets having suspected the petitioners.

7.

Pursuant to the settlement, the respondents further submit that they do not now wish to prosecute any charges against the petitioners and desire to preserve cordial relations and future bonhomie with the petitioners. The sections as mentioned in the FIR were invoked by the police officials based on the allegations, which, they submit, were levelled not realizing the consequences thereof.

8.

Upon hearing the parties and examining the nature of the dispute, it is borne out that the FIR was lodged out of a misunderstanding. Even on a plain reading, and in light of the candid statements of parties, it appears doubtful whether the essential ingredients of the offences invoked under the W.P.(CRL) 2172/2025 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.

penal provisions are satisfied. In light thereof, I am of the view that the FIR in question deserves to be quashed.

9.

Since the Respondent nos.2 and 3 do not wish to press charges against the petitioners and there is no incriminating material against them, coupled with the fact that the parties have amicably compromised the matter, further criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law and unnecessarily burden the judicial system while wasting the valuable time of the investigating agencies and prolonging the proceedings would only perpetuate animosity between the parties, whereas dropping the same would promote peace and harmony.

10.

Accordingly, invoking inherent powers vested with this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed expedient to quash the FIR in question. Reference in this context may also be had to judgment rendered in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. 11.

Consequently the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No. 0691/2024, dated 28.11.2024, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2)/333/351(3)/3(5) of the BNS, registered at P.S. Model Town, against the petitioners and further proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.

12.

All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ARUN MONGA, J SEPTEMBER 23, 2025/rs/nk W.P.(CRL) 2172/2025 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.