Ram Singh v. The State NCT of Delhi and Anr

Delhi High Court · 14 Jan 2026 · 2026:DHC:363
Manoj Jain
W.P.(CRL) 134/2026
2026:DHC:363
criminal petition_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 420 and 406 IPC based on a compromise between parties in a private dispute, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(CRL) 134/2026 1
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 14th January, 2026
W.P.(CRL) 134/2026 & CRL.M.A. 1200/2026
RAM SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Neeraj Dahiya, Mr. Arvind Kaushik and Mr. Vipin Attri, Advocates.
VERSUS
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for the State
WITH
SI Simarjeet Kaur, ISC/ Crime
Branch Chanakyapuri ND.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
JUDGMENT
(oral)

1. Petitioner herein seeks quashing of FIR No. 176/2025 dated 10.07.2025, registered at P.S. Crime Branch, New Delhi under Sections 420/406 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

2. The abovesaid FIR has been registered on the basis of the complaint made by Mr. Prateek Bhuria (respondent No.2 herein).

3. Copy of FIR has also been annexed with the present petition, which also reveals that the FIR has been registered at his behest.

4. As per the allegations, the accused had committed fraud and misrepresented in context of purchase of a farm house and the money in question was towards advance payment.

5. Fact, however, remains that both the parties have entered into settlement which has taken place before Delhi Mediation Centre, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi on 03.09.2025.

6. As per the terms of the settlement, the matter has been amicably settled W.P.(CRL) 134/2026 2 and the accused has agreed to return the entire settlement amount of Rs. 30 lacs to the complainant.

7. In fact, the complainant has already received the abovesaid amount in the month of October, 2025, through online banking mode.

8. Respondent No.2 has joined the proceedings through video conferencing and he is duly identified by I.O., who is present in Court.

9. Respondent No.2 reiterates the terms of the settlement and has no objection to the quashing of FIR which, even otherwise, involves compoundable offences.

10. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when dispute does not involve any public interest and is, primarily, private in nature. In any case, even the complainant does not wish to press any charges against the petitioner.

11. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.

12. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 176/2025 dated 10.07.2025, registered at P.S. Crime Branch, Delhi under Sections 420/406 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed.

13. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

14. Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

JUDGE JANUARY 14, 2026/ss/js