Parshant Kumar @ Mohit v. The State (NCT Of Delhi) & ANR.

$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 7659/2025 PARSHANT KUMAR @ MOHIT .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Prashant Kumar Sharma, Mr.

Vishesh Verma, Mr.

Rajendra Nayal, Mr. Jitendra Singh and Mr. Prem Prakash, Advs. Petitioner in person.

versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondents Through:

Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State with Ms. Divya Bakshi, Adv.

SI Rohit Sagar, PS Laxmi Nagar Respondent no.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

O R D E R

% 19.12.2025 1.

It has been informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the present case, FIR No. has, inadvertently, been mentioned as 169/2019 instead of 169/2017 and prays that the FIR No. should be read as FIR No. 169/2017. The Registry is directed to update the corrected FIR No.169/2017 in their records.

2.

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. 169/2017 registered at Police The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Station Shakarpur for the offences punishable under Sections 279/304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter "IPC"). 3.

The brief facts of the case are that on 10.04.2017 at about 2:20 PM, at G-Block, opposite Aruna Park, Shakarpur, Delhi, a Maruti Van bearing No. DL-8CA-W-0266, being used as a school cab, while dropping school children, was reversed in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, as a result of which Baby Anushka Ranjan, aged about 4 years, who was at the rear of the vehicle, came under the rear left tyre of the said cab. An eyewitness raised an alarm and assisted in removing the child from under the vehicle. The driver thereafter took the injured child first to Walia Nursing Home and subsequently to Max Hospital, Patparganj, where she was declared brought dead vide MLC No. 6470/17. Pursuant thereto, the FIR was registered.

4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that chargesheet has already been filed against the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner and respondent no. 2 have settled their disputes amicably and are now moving forward towards a peaceful and harmonious future. 5.

Compromise deed dated 13.10.2025 is on record and has been annexed as "Annexure P-4". Qua this deed, the respondent no. 2 has agreed to withdraw the case arising out of FIR No. 169/2017 registered at Police Station Shakarpur against the petitioner.

6.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that respondent no. 2 has settled all his claims with the petitioner and all disputes of any nature whatsoever for a sum of ₹2,70,000/-, out of which a remaining amount of ₹1,58,000/- was agreed to be paid at the time of quashing of the FIR.

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

7.

At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has paid the balance amount of ₹1,58,000/- to respondent no. 2 today. Respondent no. 2 has also acknowledged the said fact. 8.

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. 9.

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.

10.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 11.

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

12.

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

13.

Keeping in view the fact that the matter stands settled between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 amicably without any pressure, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. 14.

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

15.

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

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

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 No. 169/2017 registered at Police Station Shakarpur for the offences punishable under Sections 279/304A of the IPC, and consequent proceedings emanating therefrom, are quashed qua the present petitioner. 17.

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

AJAY DIGPAUL, J DECEMBER 19, 2025/AS/yr The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.