Mohd. Sabir Ansari v. State (GNCTD) & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 26 Sep 2025 · 2025:DHC:8688
Ravinder Dudeja
CRL.M.C. 6957/2025
2025:DHC:8688
criminal petition_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279 and 337 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

Full Text
Translation output
CRL.M.C. 6957/2025
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 26.09.2025 ,,,,,,,,,, CRL.M.C. 6957/2025 & CRL.M.A. 29215/2025 EXEMPTION
FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES ETC., CRL.M.A.
29216/2025 DELAY 18 DAYS IN RE-FILING OF PETITION.
MOHD. SABIR ANSARI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vikram Aggarwal, Adv. Petitioner in person.
VERSUS
STATE (GNCTD) & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP for the State
WITH
SI Sargam, PS
Adarsh Nagar.
R-2 in person.
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. 326/2022, dated 05.03.2022, registered at P.S Adarsh Nagar, Delhi under Sections 279/337 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

2. As per allegations made in the FIR, on 05.03.2022, petitioner’s car (DL1RTA7213) struck respondent no. 2 who was sitting on a scooter, causing grievous injuries in his right leg. Chargesheet has since been filed under sections 279/338 IPC against the petitioner.

3. During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes and executed a MOU/Settlement Deed dated 15.01.2025. It is submitted that petitioner has paid the total settlement amount of Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) as compensation to respondent no. 2/complainant as per the schedule in the settlement. Copy of the MOU/Settlement Deed dated 15.01.2025 has been annexed as Annexure P-3.

4. Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Sargam from PS Adarsh Nagar.

5. Respondent no. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioner without any force, fear, coercion. He has received the entire settlement amount and has no objection if the FIR No. 326/2022 is quashed against the petitioner. He further states that he has also received compensation of Rs. 5.10 lacs from MACT.

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. 326/2022 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,

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 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. 326/2022, dated 05.03.2022, registered at P.S Adarsh Nagar, Delhi under section 279/337 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.