Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 26.08.2025 ,,,,,,,,,, CRL.M.C.5936/2025
SURAJ .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Praveen Kaushik & Mr. Harsh Sachdeva Advs.
Petitioner in person.
… Respondents
Through: Mr. Aman Usman, APP for State
Mundka.
Mr. Dheeraj Vats, Mr. Chetan Kaushik, Mr. Ashish Kaushik
Advocate for complainant.
JUDGMENT
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
1. This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 248/2021, dated 10.04.2021, registered at P.S Mundka, Delhi under Sections 308/341/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.
2. As per averments made in the FIR, on 08.04.2021 respondent no. 2 was subjected to physical assault by petitioner and other accused with bricks, kicks and fist blows, resulting in injuries on head and hand. Chargesheet has since been filed under sections 308/341/34 IPC.
3. It has been submitted that during the pendency of proceedings, the parties have come to an amicable settlement and executed a Memorandum of Understanding dated 12.08.2025. In view of the aforesaid settlement, parties have agreed to put an end to the present dispute. Copy of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 12.08.2025 has been annexed as Annexure P-2.
4. Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Parvesh, from PS Mundka.
5. Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioner without any force, fear, coercion and he has no objection if the FIR No. 248/2021 is quashed against the petitioner.
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. 248/2021 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. 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.
10. The petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 248/2021, dated 10.04.2021, registered at P.S Mundka, Delhi under sections 308/341/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed subject to cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited by petitioner with Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a period of one month.
11. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
12. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J August 26, 2025