Mayank & Ors. Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

¶1

$~94

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of decision: 07.05.2025 + CRL.M.C. 1580/2025 MAYANK & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. R. Ramayashree Rao, Adv. with petitioner nos.1-4 in person.

¶4

versus

¶5

THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the State with SI Mamta with HC Krishan, PS-Dwarka Sec-23. Mr. Maish Kumar, Adv. for R-2 through VC. R-2 through VC.

¶6

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶7

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

¶8

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

¶9

This petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeks quashing of FIR No. 0057/2025, registered under Sections 115(2), 126(2), and 3(5) of the BNS (Under Section 323/341/34 IPC) at Police Station Sector 23, Dwarka, Delhi, along with all proceedings arising therefrom, pursuant to a settlement between the parties.

¶10

CRL.M.C. 1580/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶11

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 8.05.2025 12:44:03

¶12

The complainant/ Respondent no. 2 was attacked with a sharp object by Mayank and his associates following an argument over their turn during a driving test at Sector 22 Authority on 13.02.2025. The altercation escalated after the test, resulting in multiple stab injuries to the complainant/respondent no. 2, which resulted in the lodging of the aforesaid FIR.

¶13

During the pendency of the proceedings, both parties entered into a Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 25.02.2025 and, in pursuance thereof, agreed to approach this Hon’ble Court for quashing of the aforesaid FIR.A copy of the Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 25.02.2025 has been placed on record as Annexure P-2.

¶14

The matter was placed before the Joint Registrar on 02.05.2025, who has recorded the statements of both the parties and passed the following orders:-

¶15

“02.05.2025

¶16

Today, statement of respondent no.2 and 10 have been recorded to ascertain the veracity and the genuineness of the parties entering into settlement. Respondent no.2 has been identified by the IO. Let the pre-verified statement along with thisorder be placed before the honorable Court on 07th May, 2025. ”

¶17

Petitioner nos.1-4 are physically present before the Court while R2 has entered his appearance through VC. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Mamta from PS Dwarka Sec-23.

¶18

CRL.M.C. 1580/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶19

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 8.05.2025 12:44:03

¶20

Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the Petitioners without any force, fear, or coercion. He has no objection to the terms and conditions mentioned in the Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 25.02.2025 and further submits that he has no objection if FIR No. 0057/2025, registered under Sections 115(2), 126(2), and 3(5) of the BNS (Under Section 323/341/34 IPC) at Police Station Sector 23, Dwarka, Delhi, along with all pending proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed against the Petitioners.

¶21

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 0057/2025, registered under Sections 115(2), 126(2), and 3(5) of the BNS (Under Section 323/341/34 IPC) at Police Station Sector 23, Dwarka, Delhialongwith pending proceedingis quashed.

¶22

In Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 , Hon’ble Supreme Courthas recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under: -

¶23

"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."

¶24

CRL.M.C. 1580/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶25

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 8.05.2025 12:44:03

¶26

In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the fact that parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No. 0057/2025, registered under Sections 115(2), 126(2), and 3(5) of the BNS (Under Section 323/341/34 IPC) at Police Station Sector 23, Dwarka, Delhiand all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom.

¶27

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and FIR No. 0057/2025, registered under Sections 115(2), 126(2), and 3(5) of the BNS (Under Section 323/341/34 IPC) at Police Station Sector 23, Dwarka, Delhialong with all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

¶28