Allowed

Arun Goel & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Delhi HC1 Oct 2024W.P.(CRL)/2517/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition sought quashing of an FIR for cheating arising from a property sale dispute after the parties amicably settled. The court noted the Section 420 IPC offence is compoundable and quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings on the ground of settlement.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 527/2024 registered at PS North Rohini under Sections 420/34 IPC and all consequential proceedings quashed; pending applications disposed of.

Arun Goel & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~105

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

+ W.P.(CRL) 2517/2024 & CRL.M.A. 26450/2024

¶4

ARUN GOEL & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta, Mr. C. Prakash, Mr. Ankit Goel, Ms. Ginni Garg, Mr. Abhishemath Gupta, Mr. Ramakant and Mohit Garg, Advs. (through VC) with P-1 (through VC) & P- 2, 5 & 6 in person

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anand V. Khatri, ASC for the State Complainant in person

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN O R D E R % 01.10.2024

¶8

The present petition is filed inter alia seeking quashing of FIR No. 527/2024 dated 18.08.2024, registered at Police Station North Rohini, for offences under Sections 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘ IPC ’).

¶9

The FIR was registered pursuant to order dated 12.08.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, North-West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi, in Cr Rev No.115/2024 whereby directions were issued to the concerned SHO to register an FIR under the relevant provisions on the complaint made by Respondent No.2.

¶10

It is alleged that Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4, who are property

¶11

Page 1 of 3

¶12

W.P.(CRL) 2517/2024

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 03:15:38

¶14

dealers, had introduced Petitioner No.1 and Petitioner No.2 (father of Petitioner No.1) to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, who are married to each other. It is alleged that Petitioner No.1 was falsely represented to be the absolute owner of the property in question, that is, property bearing No. B-4/126, 1^st Floor, Paschim Vihar, Delhi-63 (hereafter ‘ subject property ’). It is alleged that Petitioner No.1 had entered into an Agreement to Sell in relation to the subject property and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were induced to purchase the same and were cheated of a sum of ₹61,51,000/- , out of the total sale amount of ₹1,61,51,000/-.

¶15

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the subject property was jointly owned by the petitioners and other persons and the said fact was known to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 5. He submits that the parties have since amicably resolved their dispute, on their own free will, without any force, fraud or pressure.

¶16

The learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 states that Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are satisfied with the settlement amount and they do not wish to pursue the proceedings arising out of the present FIR.

¶17

Petitioner No.1 is present through video conference. Petitioner Nos. 2, 5 and 6 and Respondent No.2 are present in person. The parties have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer.

¶18

The learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State submits that the offence is compoundable in nature and has no objection if the FIR is quashed. Respondent No. 2, on being asked, reaffirms the submission made by State.

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

W.P.(CRL) 2517/2024

¶21

¶22

Offence under Section 420 of the IPC is compoundable in nature.

¶23

This Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by relegating the parties to the learned Trial Court for filing an application to compound the offence.

¶24

Keeping in view the nature of dispute and that the parties have amicably entered into a settlement, this Court feels that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the dispute alive and continuance of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court.

¶25

In view of the above, FIR No. 527/2024 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed on the ground of settlement.

¶26

The present petition is allowed in aforesaid terms. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶27

AMIT MAHAJAN, J

¶28

OCTOBER 1, 2024 “SS”

¶29

Page 3 of 3

¶30

W.P.(CRL) 2517/2024

¶31

This is a digitally signed order.

¶32

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 03:15:38

Arun Goel & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Goel & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Dutt Sharma Vs the Govt. of Gnct of Delhi

Kishore Vs State & Ors.

Sant Ram Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Manoj Singh and Ors. Vs State through SHO Ewo New Delhi

Ramaasre @ Deepak Vs the State & Anr.

Ms. Monika Vs State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Pankaj Kumar Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Sh Darshan Kumar @Bhallu Vs State of Govt of NCT of Delhi through SHO

Shakuntala Devi Vs State & Anr.

Narender Sahariya Vs Manju Sahariya

Jagbir Singh Vs the State and Anr. NCT of Delhi through SHO & Anr.

Genesis Infratech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Sanjana Verma

Pinki @ Ritu Singh & Anr. Vs Rajnikant & Ors.

Monish Alam Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Others