Arvind Kumar and Others Vs the State and Another

¶1

$~63 - 64

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(CRL) 2573/2025 ARVIND KUMAR AND OTHERS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Naveen Kumar Thakur, Mr. Satendar, Mr. Ram Kumar, Mr. Uttam Kumar and Mr. Sonu Kumar, Advocates alongwith Petitioners in person. versus THE STATE AND ANOTHER .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC (CRL), Mr. Sangeet Sibou, Mr. Priyansh Raj Singh Senger, Mr. Aniket Kumar Singh, Advocate with ASI Ashok Kumar, PS H. Nizamudin, SI Amit Beniwal, PS M.S. Park. Mr. Deepak Kumar and Mr. Satendar Chauhan for Respondents alongwith Respondents in person. 64 + W.P.(CRL) 2583/2025 PRATHAM VISHNOI AND OTHERS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Deepak Kumar and Mr. Satendar Chauhan, Advocates alongwith Petitioners in person. versus THE STATE AND ANOTHER .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC (CRL), Mr. Sangeet Sibou, Mr. Priyansh Raj Singh Senger, Mr. Aniket Kumar Singh, Advocate with ASI Ashok Kumar, PS H. Nizamudin, SI Amit Beniwal, PS M.S. Park alongwith Respondents in person.

¶4

This is a digitally signed order.

¶5

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 16/09/2025 at 12:44:58

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶7

O R D E R

¶8

% 19.08.2025

¶9

Petitioners herein seek quashing of an FIR No. 220/2025 dated 05.05.2025 under Sections 351(2), 117, 126(2), 3(5) of BNS and the second bearing no. 221/2025 dated 05.05.2025 under Sections 115, 126(2), 351, 3(5), both lodged at Police Station Mansarovar Park, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise between the parties.

¶10

Both FIRs, ibid , arising out of the same incident on the same date, represent a version and counter-version of the dispute. A heated altercation degenerated into an unsavoury scuffle, with each side alleging assault, intimidation, and misbehaviour against the other.

¶11

In the aforesaid backdrop, having heard the counsel and interacted with the complainant who is present in Court.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners in both petitions submit that there was a serious misunderstanding on the part of their clients that led to lodging of FIR and cross FIR, as above. The parties have now amicably settled the matter vide MOU/ Settlement Deed dated 01.07.2025 placed on record (Annexure P-2) and hence the two petitions seeking quashing of the two FIRs.

¶13

The learned ASC for the State and counsel for Respondents in both the petitions concur with the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties and convey there no objection to the quashing of the FIRs.

¶14

The parties are present before the Court in person. Upon interaction, it

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 16/09/2025 at 12:44:58

¶17

appears that the underlying dispute, being private in nature, has indeed been amicably resolved. They further affirm in unison, of their own free will and without any coercion or duress that they do not wish to pursue the matter and consent to the quashing of the FIRs in question.

¶18

I am of the view both petitions deserve to be allowed.

¶19

The dispute between the parties who are neighbours was in relation to the handling of their respective pets.

¶20

On a Court query, it transpires that complainant in FIR no. 220/2025, ibid, is in the business of baking and selling pizzas and the complainant in the other cross FIR is also a respectable citizen. In such circumstances, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would rather amount to an abuse of the process of law. Not quashing the criminal proceedings would rather rekindle hostility, whereas quashing the same would promote cordiality and bonhomie between the neighbours.

¶21

It is thus deemed just and appropriate to invoke the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS to prevent undue hardship to the parties and promote mutual goodwill and societal harmony. 11. However, both the complainants in the two FIRs are directed to join hands and jointly bear the expenses, which shall be incurred for providing Amul Chaach Tetra Pack along with Mix Vegetable Pizzas to the inmates who are currently residing at Sanskar Ashram, Near G.T.B Hospital, Dilshad Garden, Delhi. Each inmate and the attendants and other staff of the Ashram shall be served one Pizza along with Amul Chaach Tetra Pack. The Pizzas shall be baked by the complainant in the FIR No.220/2025 dated 05.05.2025 registered at P.S. Mansarovar Park and the same shall be treated as the community service to be jointly carried out by all the complainants and the

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 16/09/2025 at 12:44:58

¶24

accused by serving the same.

¶25

Accordingly, the petitions are allowed. FIR No. 220/2025 dated 05.05.2025 under Sections 351(2), 117, 126(2), 3(5) BNS and the second bearing no. 221/2025 dated 05.05.2025 under Sections 115, 126(2), 351, 2(5), both lodged at Police Station Mansarovar Park, and all other consequential proceedings are hereby quashed, subject to compliance of the aforesaid directions and the report having been filed before this Court through the Investigating Officer.

¶26

Soft copy of the menu has been forwarded on the whatsapp of the I.O., who will ensure that quality of the pizza is same as has been stated in the menu.

¶27

ARUN MONGA, J

¶28

AUGUST 19, 2025 / rs/nk

¶29

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 16/09/2025 at 12:44:58

Arvind Kumar and Others v. the State and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Kumar and Others v. the State and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brijesh Singh Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Rrpr Holding P Ltd. & Ors. Vs Directorate of Enforcement

Praveen Rana Vs State Gnct of Delhi

Xy Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Krishan Kumar and Anr. Vs the State Govt NCT of Delhi and Anr.

As Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Devesh Pal Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Ajay Kumar @ Ganja Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rahul Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Mandeep Alias Krishan Alias Kala Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Kapil Verma Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Alok Vs State

Mahesh Kumar Sharma Vs M/S Paras Polymers Pvt. Ltd.

Sonak Shaurya Vs the State of NCT of Delhi