Rajesh Bainsla @ Sunny v. The State Govt Of NCT Delhi And ANR
$~71 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 6525/2025 RAJESH BAINSLA @ SUNNY .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Dalvinder Singh, Advocate.
versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through:
Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP for State with SI Sunit, PS-Jagat Puri.
Mr. Nitin Kapoor, Advocate for R2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
O R D E R
% 26.11.2025 1.
The matter is taken up today as 25.11.2025 was declared as holiday on account of Guru Teg Bahadur's Martyrdom Day. 2.
The present petition has been filed on behalf of petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 of BNSS seeking quashing of FIR No. - 0197/2023, under Section U/S 308/341 IPC registered at PS-Jagat Puri. 3.
Issue notice. Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, learned APP for State accepts notice.
4.
The petitioners, as well as, respondent no. 2, who are present in Court, have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer, SI Sunit, PS-Jagat Puri. 5.
A complaint was lodged by the complainant that on 28.03.2023 at about 9:00 PM, while returning home he was attacked by a person carrying a The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
plastic bucket with an intention to kill. He struck him on his head and attempted to hit again. When resisted, another youth came from behind and hit him with a plastic object on his right ear, which led to the registration of present E-FIR.
6.
During pendency of the proceedings, due to the intervention of the respectable persons and other family members, the parties have amicably resolved their disputes and arrived at a settlement, the terms whereof have been reduced in writing in the compromise/settlement deed, which is annexed as Annexure-P3 to the present petition. 7.
On a query posed by the Court, respondent no.2 states he has settled the matter with the petitioner and does not wish to prosecute the criminal proceedings any further and he has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. The injury suffered is stated to be simple in nature. 8.
At this stage, apt would it be to refer to the observations of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303: (SCC p. 340, para 58) "58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor."
9.
In view of the settlement between the parties, the ultimate chances of conviction in the case are bleak, therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings will not serve any useful purpose and it will be an exercise in futility.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
10.
It is, thus, in the interest of justice that the present FIR and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed. 11.
Consequently, the petition is allowed and the FIR No. 0197/2023, under Section U/S 308/341 IPC registered at PS-Jagat Puri alongwith all other proceedings emanating therefrom, is quashed. 12.
The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. VIKAS MAHAJAN, J NOVEMBER 26, 2025/jg The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.