Shri Satpal Singh Alias Raju & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

¶1

$~54

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(CRL) 1210/2025, CRL.M.A. 11495/2025 SHRI SATPAL SINGH ALIAS RAJU & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Ankit, Advocate. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State.

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶5

O R D E R

¶6

% 04.08.2025

¶7

Petitioner herein, inter alia , seeks compromise quashing of FIR No. 666/2023 registered at Police Station Subhash Place , Delhi , under Sections 323, 341, 308, 34 IPC, as well as the consequential proceedings arising there from. It is now stated that all disputes between the parties have been amicably resolved and continuation of the further proceedings would serve no useful purpose.

¶8

As per the FIR, an altercation took place between the petitioners and Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 leading to cross fight and also use of weapons etc.

¶9

In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and respondents as well perused the material available on record.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute between the parties arose on 01.10.2023, which subsequently led to the registration of the aforesaid FIR. However, during the pendency of investigation, the

¶11

W.P.(CRL) 1210/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 02/09/2025 at 12:44:50

¶14

parties have amicably resolved their disputes and executed a Settlement Deed dated 05.03.2025.

¶15

Learned counsel for the respondent No.2-complainant and learned Public Prosecutor concur with the fact of compromise and submit that in view of the compromise, they have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

¶16

5. B oth sides appear before this Court and confirm that the settlement was arrived at voluntarily, without any coercion, undue influence or pressure.

¶17

Having heard and interacted with parties and seen the settlement deed dated 05.03.2025 and the undertakings of respondent No.2 and respondent No.3, it appears that the disputes between the parties arose out of personal discord due to some misunderstanding perceptions. They have now been amicably resolved.

¶18

It seems that there is no duress or coercion of any kind on the complainant and he is withdrawing all the charges/ allegations leveled against the petitioner at the relevant time which he states arose out of the heated exchange/altercation which took place between the two of them resulting in the unsavory incident of the complainant and the petitioner getting physically violent with each other due to which the complainant suffered minor injuries.

¶19

The complainant/victim has no objection to the quashing of FIR in question and has consented voluntary and not induced by any coercion or undue influence. He says allegations qua serious offences were levelled in

¶20

W.P.(CRL) 1210/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

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 02/09/2025 at 12:44:50

¶23

heat of the moment and regrets having done that now that he has been made aware of the adverse consequences thereof.

¶24

The settlement deed has been signed voluntarily by all parties and reflects a fair compromise. In order to maintain cordiality and mutual bonhomie between the private parties who are stated to be neighbors, it is deemed appropriate to quash the FIR in the larger interest of maintaining peace and law & order in the society.

¶25

9 . On the other hand, allowing the proceedings to continue would unnecessarily burden the judicial system and amount to an abuse of the process of law. Continuing the prosecution despite the complainant’s stand would serve no constructive purpose and may instead lead to unnecessary hardship to the parties to settlement and would only rekindle tensions and hinder the process of healing between the parties, especially when even otherwise ingredients of the offences as alleged are not made out on merits also.

¶26

Thus, invoking inherent powers vested with this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS it is deemed expedient to quash the FIR. Reference in this context may also be had to judgment rendered in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303].

¶27

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. FIR no. 666/2023 dated 02.10.2023, lodged at police station Subhash Place and all other consequential proceedings for offences under Sections 323, 341, 308, 34 of IPC, against the petitioners are hereby quashed.

¶28

W.P.(CRL) 1210/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 02/09/2025 at 12:44:50

¶31

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶32

ARUN MONGA, J

¶33

AUGUST 4, 2025/ nk

¶34

W.P.(CRL) 1210/2025 Page 4 of 4

¶35

This is a digitally signed order.

¶36

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 02/09/2025 at 12:44:50

Shri Satpal Singh Alias Raju & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Satpal Singh Alias Raju & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhishek Kumar Vs Neha Lal

Hitender Singh & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi through SHO Ps Tilak Nagar Delhi & Anr.

Sanjeev Kumar Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Sweety Vs the State NCT of Delhi through SHO Ps Paschim Vihar East & Anr.

Manish@Lulu Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Anjali & Anr. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Patron Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State & Ors.

Prince Tyagi and Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Shubham Kumar Vs Ncb

Rajeev Kumar Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

Naman Jain and Anr. Vs State (Govt Ofnct of Delhi) and Anr.

Mohd. Riyajuddin & Ors. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Mr Manoj Goyal Vs Sh Sumit Bansal

Sh Vinod Kumar Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.