Salauddin Khan v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

$~64 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 6460/2025 SALAUDDIN KHAN .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Madhav Khurana, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vaibhav Suri, Mr. Saud Khan, Mr. Md. Imran Ahmad, Mr. Pulkit Shree and Mr. Teeksh Singhal, Advs. along with the petitioner in person versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for State with Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh, Adv. With SI Manju Yadav, IO PS Chanakyapuri Mr. Shikhar Sharma, Adv. for R-2 along with respondent no. 2 in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

O R D E R

% 25.09.2025 1.

The instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter "BNSS") [earlier Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter "CrPC.")] has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing of FIR No. 120/2021, registered at Police Station Chanakya Puri, for offences punishable under Sections 376/377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter "IPC"). A chargesheet was filed subsequently where offence under Sections 323/142/384/506/174A of the IPC were included in addition Section 376/377 of the IPC. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the respondent no. 2 and the petitioner first came into contact on the social media platform Instagram, which led to the development of a relationship. On 04.02.2020, the respondent no.2 travelled to Dubai to be with the petitioner furthering their relationship. On 02.10.2020, the petitioner and respondent no. 2 mutually decided to part ways and the respondent no. 2 returned to India. Subsequently, the aforesaid FIR was lodged, allegedly due to a misunderstanding.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the statement recorded on 15.07.2024, the respondent no. 2 admitted that the complaint was filed because the petitioner declined to provide her money in connection with a business dispute. It is submitted that the respondent no. 2 confirmed that their physical relationship was entirely consensual. It is submitted that chargesheet was filed on 13.11.2024. It is further submitted that the petitioner and respondent no. 2 have amicably settled their disputes and are desirous of leading a peaceful and harmonious life. 4.

The respondent no. 2 appearing in person submits that she has no objection if the present FIR be quashed as the parties have already settled the matter to which the petitioner appearing in person has given consent. 5.

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. 6.

Learned APP for the State, who appears on advance notice, accepts notice and submits that there is no opposition to the prayer made by the petitioner seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

7.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

8.

The petitioner is present before this Court and has been identified by his counsel and Investigating Officer, Police Station Chanakya Puri. Respondent no. 2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel and the Investigating Officer.

9.

Upon a query put forth by this Court, respondent no.2 has categorically stated that she has entered into the compromise of her own volition and without any coercion or undue influence. It has further been stated that the entire dispute stands amicably resolved between the parties. She affirmed that the said settlement has been arrived at for securing her future and the parties have decided to put a quietus to the present proceedings.

10.

Keeping in view the fact that the matter stands amicably settled between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 without any pressure, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. 11.

In view of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement and further having regard to the fact that no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them.

12.

It is, thus, in the interest of justice to quash the afore-mentioned FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

13.

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 No. 120/2021, registered at Police Station Chanakya Puri, for offences punishable under Sections 376/377 of the IPC, and consequent proceedings emanating therefrom, are quashed qua the present petitioner. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

14.

The petition along with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

AJAY DIGPAUL, J SEPTEMBER 25, 2025 gs/av The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.