Nitin Hooda v. The State of NCT of Delhi and Anr

1. Petitioner seeks quashing of case FIR No. 358/2024 of PS Dwarka South for offence under Section 109(1) BNS read with Section 27 Arms Act on the ground that the complainant de facto (respondent no.2) has compromised the disputes with the petitioner.

2. At the outset, learned APP points out that earlier the petitioner filed a similar petition for quashing the same FIR and the said petition bearing no. CRL.M.C. 9429/2024 was dismissed as unconditionally withdrawn vide order dated 02.12.2024 of a coordinate bench. That being so, according to learned APP the present petition is not even maintainable. CRL.M.C.5761/2025 pages

3. Broadly speaking, the allegation against the petitioner is that he pointed his pistol at respondent no.2, who at that time was accompanied with his children; and the petitioner challenged to kill respondent no.2, after which he pulled the trigger, firing a bullet which missed the target because the person accompanying the petitioner held hand of the petitioner. Had the bullet not misfired, the consequences would have been fatal. Had the bullet hit the child, consequences would have been far worse.

4. Considering the circumstances narrated above, I am not satisfied that it is in the interest of justice to quash the proceedings. Rather, even after unconditional withdrawal of the earlier petition, this petition has been filed afresh and is a total waste of judicial time.

5. Therefore, the petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.25,000/- to be deposited by petitioner with DHCLSC within one week. Copy of this order be sent to the trial court to ensure deposit of cost by the petitioner. Pending application stands disposed of.

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) AUGUST 21, 2025