Allowed

Kuldeep & Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC4 Aug 2025CRL.M.C./1818/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Delhi High Court order quashing an FIR under 323/365/506/34 IPC filed relatives after they reached an amicable settlement via a Compromise Deed dated 03.02.2025, invoking Section 528 BNS 2023/

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 0101/2016 and all consequential proceedings are quashed; petitioners and Respondent No. 2 directed to deposit Rs. 5,000/- each as litigation cost.

Kuldeep & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~47

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 1818/2025, CRL.M.A. 8249/2025 & CRL.M.A. 8250/2025

¶4

KULDEEP & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Manoj Verma, Advocate with Petitioners in person

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State with SI Ashutosh Mishra, P.S. Mehrauli R-2 in person

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA O R D E R % 04.08.2025

¶9

Petition under 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the Petitioner seeking quashing of FIR No. 0101/2016 registered under Sections 323/365/506/34 IPC at P.S. Mehrauli and all proceedings arising therefrom in terms of the Compromise Deed dated 03.02.2025.

¶10

It is submitted that the Petitioners were known to the Complainant and on account of some money transaction, they had a fight, which resulted into registration of this FIR.

¶11

The Petitioners and the Respondent No. 2 are present in person in the Court and have been identified by the IO.

¶12

The parties have endorsed the amicable settlement and accepted the terms thereof voluntarily and they submit that the said Settlement has been

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 06/08/2025 at 11:54:46

¶15

arrived at between the parties, without any pressure and coercion and that they shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement.

¶16

The parties have submitted that all the disputes have been amicably settled vide Compromise Deed dated 03.02.2025 and thus, no fruitful purpose will be served in continuing with the FIR.

¶17

In view of the above facts that the parties have amicably resolved their differences out of their own free will and without any coercion and also the fact that the present matter is related to relatives, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them. Hence, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶18

Moreover, there is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

¶19

Accordingly, considering the totality of circumstances and the fact that the parties have settled the matter amicably, the FIR No. 0101/2016 registered under Sections 323/365/506/34 IPC at P.S. Mehrauli and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

¶20

Petitioners and the Respondent No. 2 are directed to deposit the cost of Rs.5,000/-, each with the Delhi High Court Legal Aid Services as the cost of litigation.

¶21

The Petition alongwith pending Applications, stands disposed of.

¶22

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

¶23

AUGUST 4, 2025 N

¶24

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 06/08/2025 at 11:54:46

Kuldeep & Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep & Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

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

Pawan Kumar Anthony and Ors. Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Leela Wati Vs State of the NCT of Delhi & Anr.

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

Sachin Tyagi Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Kailashpati Polyplast Pvt. Ltd. Vs Raghav Industries

Harsh Vs State of N.C.T. of Delhi and Another