Allowed¶19

Mawasi Ram & Anr. v. the State ( Govt, N.C.T of Delhi) & Anr.

Delhi HC1 Aug 2025CRL.M.C./5142/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mawasi Ram; quashing of FIR No. 0071/2013; Sections 380/448/34 IPC; P.S. Bhajanpura; Compromise Deed dated 08.07.2025; amicable settlement; Section 528 BNSS 2023; Section 482 CrPC 1973; CRL.M.C. 5142/2025; CRL.M.A. 22275/2025; Neena Bansal Krishna; 01.08.2025; High Court of Delhi; criminal quashing on basis of compromise.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 0071/2013 registered under Sections 380/448/34 IPC at P.S. Bhajanpura and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, pursuant to the Compromise Deed dated 08.07.2025; the Petition alongwith the pending Application stands disposed of. ¶19

Mawasi Ram & Anr. Vs the State ( Govt, N.C.T of Delhi) & Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 0071/2013 registered under Sections 380/448/34 IPC at P.S. Bhajanpura and all proceedings arising therefrom should be quashed in terms of the Compromise Deed dated 08.07.2025 between the parties.

¶10

Court's answer

Since the parties amicably resolved their differences out of their own free will and without any coercion, and Respondent No. 2 had no objection to quashing of the FIR, no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings, which would only create further acrimony; it is in the interest of justice to quash the FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

FIR No. 0071/2013 registered under Sections 380/448/34 IPC at P.S. Bhajanpura and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed, considering the nature of the allegations and the compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Neena Bansal Krishna, J.), by order dated 01.08.2025 in CRL.M.C. 5142/2025, quashed FIR No. 0071/2013 registered under Sections 380/448/34 IPC at P.S. Bhajanpura and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. The FIR related to a property dispute in which Respondent No. 2, having purchased the property from the Petitioners, was alleged to have forcibly occupied it. The parties arrived at an amicable settlement vide Compromise Deed dated 08.07.2025, endorsed before the Court voluntarily and without pressure or coercion, with Respondent No. 2 having no objection to quashing. Holding that no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings and that it would be in the interest of justice to quash the FIR, the Court allowed the petition filed under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and disposed of it alongwith the pending application.

¶1

$~46

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 5142/2025 & CRL.M.A. 22275/2025

¶4

MAWASI RAM & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Chandan Mishra, Mr. S.S. Lathi and Mr. Mukesh, Advocates with Petitioners in person

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE (GOVT. N.C.T OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State with SI Akash Kumar, P.S. Bhajanpura R-2 in person

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

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

¶9

% 01.08.2025

¶10

Petition under 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the Petitioners seeking quashing of FIR No. 0071/2013 registered under Sections 380/448/34 IPC at P.S. Bhajanpura and all proceedings arising therefrom in terms of the Compromise Deed dated 08.07.2025.

¶11

The dispute arose as the Respondent No. 2 had purchased the property from the Petitioners but she had forcibly occupied the property and also removed the belongings of the Respondent No. 2 due to which FIR No. 0071/2013 was registered.

¶12

The parties are present in person in the Court and have been identified by the IO.

¶13

The parties have endorsed the amicable settlement vide Compromise

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 05/08/2025 at 12:05:25

¶16

Deed dated 08.07.2025 and accepted the terms thereof voluntarily and they submit that the said Settlement has been arrived at between the parties, without any pressure and coercion and that they shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement.

¶17

The parties have submitted that all the disputes have been amicably settled vide Compromise Deed dated 08.07.2025 and thus, no fruitful purpose will be served in continuing with the FIR.

¶18

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 Respondent No. 2 has no objection if the FIR is quashed, 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.

¶19

Accordingly, considering the nature of the allegations and the compromise arrived at between the parties, the FIR No. 0071/2013 registered under Sections 380/448/34 IPC at P.S. Bhajanpura and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

¶20

The Petition alongwith pending Application, stands disposed of.

¶21

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

¶22

AUGUST 1, 2025 N

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

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 05/08/2025 at 12:05:25

Mawasi Ram & Anr. v. the State ( Govt, N.C.T of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mawasi Ram & Anr. v. the State ( Govt, N.C.T of Delhi) & Anr.

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

Directorate of Enforcement Vs Sanjeev Kapoor

Ravi Kumar Vs State(Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Smt Poonam Sharma & Anr. Vs the State & Anr.

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.