Rajender Parsad & ORS. v. The State NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

$~58 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4910/2025 &CRL.M.A. 21261/2025 RAJENDER PARSAD & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Vikas Bhatia, Mr. Aman Jwala, Ms. Jyoti Verma and Ms. Shivangi Sharma, Advs. Petitoners no. 1 to 3 in person.

Petitioner no. 4 (Through VC).

versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for the State with SI Sunder Singh, PS Nangloi.

Mr. Sumit Kadyan, Adv. for R-2 with Respondent No. 2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

O R D E R

% 24.07.2025 1.

The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter "Cr.P.C" read with Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter "BNSS") has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing of FIR 577/2021 registered at Police Station Nangloi on 11.08.2021, for offences punishable under Sections 323/354/451/509/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter "IPC"). 2.

The petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel and the Investigating Officer, Police Station Nangloi.Respondent 2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel and the Investigating Officer.

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

3.

The brief facts of the case, having been admitted, are that the husband of respondent no. 2 was at work on 10.08.2021, the petitioners entered the house of respondent no.2 and committed acts of physical violence and molestation, committing acts of aggression and also hurting her child who fainted as a result. On finding an opportunity to escape, she managed to leave the house and alert a crowd. Upon the crowd's arrival, the petitioners fled the scene and the police along with respondent no.2's brother were called, after which medical examination and other formalities were conducted. The FIR in question was filed the next day. 4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners and respondent no. 2 have settled their disputes amicably and are now moving forward towards a peaceful and harmonious future. 5.

On a query made by this Court, respondent no. 2 has categorically stated that she has entered into this compromise on his own free will and without any pressure. It is also stated by her that the entire dispute has been amicably settled between the parties.

6.

Compromise deed dated 28.05.2025 is on record and has been annexed as Annexure E. On the basis of this deed, respondent no. 2 has agreed to withdraw the case arising out of FIR 577/2021 registered at Police Station Nangloi against the petitioners.

7.

It is prayed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties that the instant FIR may be quashed on the basis of the compromise. 8.

At this juncture, learned APP for the State drew our attention to the statement made by the victim before the magistrate under Section 164 of the CrPC. She had stated then, that while registering the FIR, the five petitioners and some of their supporters arrived at the police station to threaten The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

respondent no.2 to take back the case or they would "implicate her husband in a cross-case".

9.

On being made aware of this, the court found it appropriate to direct the petitioners to leave the courtroom and switch off VC proceedings so that the victim may feel at ease to speak freely.

10.

In fact, petitioner no.1 did file FIR 605/2021 at PS Nangloi on 20.08.2021 under sections 323, 341, and 34 IPC against respondent no.2's husband.

11.

We take on record the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, that FIR 605/2021 mentioned supra stands quashed. 12.

Despite this, the victim has been adamant to quash the proceedings, stating that the petitioners have admitted their mistake, and that this admission itself is adequate.

13.

Upon perusal of the compromise deed, we notice that no compensation, monetary or otherwise, has even been offered to the victim by the petitioners.

14.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 15.

Keeping in view the fact that the matter stands amicably been settled between the petitioners and the respondent no. 2 amicably without any pressure, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. 16.

Hence, in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab(2012) 10 SCC 303, FIR 577/2021 registered at Police Station Nangloi, for offences punishable under Sections 323/354/451/509/34 of the IPC, and consequent proceedings emanating therefrom, are quashed subject to payment of costs of Rs.50,000/- in toto, amounting to a sum of Rs. 12,500/- payable by each petitioner, which shall The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

be payable to the victim within a period of four weeks from today. The receipt of payment is to be deposited with, and to be verified by, the concerned IO.

17.

The petition, along with pending applications, if any, stands disposed of.

AJAY DIGPAUL, J JULY 24, 2025 Sk/av The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.