Kunal Sharma v. The State Govt Of N.C.T. Of Delhi & ANR.
$~76 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 15.10.2025 ,,,,,,,,,, + CRL.M.C.7328/2025 & CRL.M.A. 30735/2025-EXEMPTION KUNAL SHARMA .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Anubhav Bhardwaj, Adv.
Petitioner is present through vc versus THE STATE GOVT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ANR.
.....Respondent Through:
Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP with SI Nimmi, P.S.Shahdara.
Mr. A.K.Mehta, Adv. and Ms.
Gunjan Kumari, Adv. for R-2 R-2 is present through vc.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA JUDGMENT(ORAL) RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
1.
This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 360/2023, dated 09.11.2023, registered at P.S Shahdara, Delhi under Sections279/337 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.
CRL.M.C. 7328/2025 Page 1 of 4
2.
As per averments made in the FIR, on 01.11.2023 around 11:30 PM while driving Car bearing no DL8CNB8208 in a rash and negligent manner, petitioner struck against the Scooty of respondent no.2 bearing no. DL5SCY478 thereby causing grievous injuries to respondent no2. Chargesheet has since been filed under sections 279/337/338 IPC against the petitioner.
3.
During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes and the terms of the compromise were reduced into writing in the form of a Memorandum of Understanding dated 10.09.2025. It is submitted that petitioner has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 2,25,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs Twenty Five Thousand only) to respondent no. 2. Copy of the Settlement Memorandum of Understanding dated 10.09.2025 has been annexed as Annexure P-4.
4.
Parties have entered their appearance through VC. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Nimmi from PS Shahdara. 5.
Respondent no. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioner without any force, fear, coercion and he has received the entire settlement amount and has no objection if the FIR No. 360/2023 is quashed against the petitioner. CRL.M.C. 7328/2025 Page 2 of 4
6.
In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 360/2023 is quashed.
7.
In Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon'ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under:- "61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings."
8.
Further, it is settled that the inherent powers under section 482 of the Code are required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of any court. Further, the High Court can quash non-compoundable offences after considering the nature of the offence and the amicable settlement between the concerned parties. Reliance may be placed upon B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675.
9.
While it is true that the offence under Section 279 of IPC is not an offence in personam, thereby that it affects society at large and not CRL.M.C. 7328/2025 Page 3 of 4
just the individual complainant, the Court must also take into account the practical realities of securing a conviction in the present case. The Supreme Court has consistently held that where the chances of conviction are remote due to an amicable settlement between the parties, the Court should consider whether continuing the prosecution would serve any meaningful purpose.
10.
In view of the above facts that the parties have amicably resolved their differences out of their own free will and without any coercion. Hence, it would be in the interest of justice, to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. 11.
The petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 360/2023, dated 09.11.2023, registered at P.S Shahdara, Delhi under Sections279/337 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.
12.
Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 13.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. RAVINDER DUDEJA, J October 15, 2025 SK CRL.M.C. 7328/2025 Page 4 of 4