Naman Rexwal. & ANR. v. State Of Delhi & ANR.

$~119 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3770/2025 NAMAN REXWAL. & ANR.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Sanjay Rathi, Mr. Jaydish Punia, Mr. Sourabh Dedha and Ms. Preeti, Advs. with petitioners in person.

versus STATE OF DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Sanjay Lao, SC for State with Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Adv. with ASI Ram Kumar PS Badarpur.

Mr. Chetan Giri and Mr. Mohit Kaushik, Advs. for R-2. With R-2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 17.11.2025 CRL.M.A. 34010/2025 (exemption) 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 3770/2025 3.

The present petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 seeking quashing of FIR No.569/2025 under Sections 115(2)/126(2)/351(2) of BNS registered at Police Station Badarpur and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement.

4.

Issue notice. Mr. Sanjay Lao, learned Standing Counsel for the State accepts notice.

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

5.

The petitioners, as well as, respondent nos. 2 are present in Court and they have been identified by their respective counsel, as well as by the Investigating Officer ASI Ram Kumar PS Badarpur. 6.

The case of the prosecution in brief is that the parties are relatives to each other and there was some personal and family related dispute between the parties due to which scuffle took place between petitioners and respondent no.2, which led to the registration of FIR. 7.

During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at a settlement, the terms whereof were reduced in writing in the form of settlement deed dated 11.11.2025, which is annexed as Annexure P-2 to the present petition.

8.

Respondent no.2, who is present in Court, on a query posed by the Court, affirms the factum of settlement and states that he has no objection in case the FIR is quashed.

9.

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."

10.

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

futility.

11.

It is, thus, in the interest of justice that the present FIR and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed. 12.

Consequently, the petition is allowed and the FIR No.569/2025 under Sections 115(2)/126(2)/351(2) of BNS registered at Police Station Badarpur alongwith all other proceedings emanating therefrom, are quashed. 13.

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. 14.

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. VIKAS MAHAJAN, J NOVEMBER 17, 2025 N.S. ASWAL The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.