Allowed¶25

Sonak Shaurya v. the State of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC19 Aug 2025CRL.M.C./5200/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR on compromise; inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS; offences under Sections 354A, 354D and 509 IPC; vulgar messages on Instagram/social media; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 applied; FIR No. 280/2021 dated 04.06.2021, P.S. Amar Colony; CRL.M.C. 5200/2025; High Court of Delhi; decided 19.08.2025 by Justice Arun Monga; complainant settled voluntarily without coercion.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; FIR No. 280/2021 dated 04.06.2021 of Police Station Amar Colony and all consequential proceedings for offences under Sections 354A, 354D and 509 IPC quashed against the petitioner; pending applications disposed of. ¶25

Sonak Shaurya Vs the State of NCT of Delhi — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 280/2021 dated 04.06.2021 lodged at Police Station Amar Colony and all consequential proceedings for offences under Sections 354A, 354D and 509 IPC should be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties.

¶11

Court's answer

Applying the ratio of Gian Singh (supra) and in view of the genuine compromise, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to invoke its inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS to prevent undue hardship and promote mutual goodwill and societal harmony, holding that allowing the criminal proceedings to continue in light of the compromise would be an abuse of the process of law.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

FIR No. 280/2021 dated 04.06.2021 lodged at Police Station Amar Colony and all consequential proceedings for offences under Sections 354A, 354D and 509 of IPC are quashed against the petitioner.

¶30

Key takeaways

The Court found the settlement to be voluntary: the complainant, a well-educated lady serving as a Pilot in Air India, fully conscious of her rights, candidly submitted that she arrived at the settlement on her own volition and that there was no coercion or duress of any kind.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Arun Monga, J) allowed CRL.M.C. 5200/2025 and quashed FIR No. 280/2021 dated 04.06.2021 of P.S. Amar Colony together with all consequential proceedings for offences under Sections 354A, 354D and 509 IPC against the petitioner, on the basis of a genuine compromise between the parties. Applying the ratio of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr., (2012) 10 SCC 303, and invoking the inherent powers of the Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, the Court held that allowing the criminal proceedings to continue in light of the compromise would be an abuse of the process of law and would cause undue hardship, whereas quashing would promote mutual goodwill and societal harmony. The complainant (Respondent No.2), a Pilot with Air India, affirmed in Court that she settled the dispute arising out of a misunderstanding on her own volition and without any coercion or duress; the APP confirmed on the IO's instructions that the compromise was genuine. Pending applications were disposed of.

¶1

$~46

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 5200/2025 and CRL.M.A. 22463/2025 & CRL.M.A. 22464/2025

¶4

SONAK SHAURYA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Akshat Srivastava and Ms.Samvesh Jha, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State with Inspector Rajeev Kumar, PS – Amar Colony.

¶7

Mr. Aman Bidhuri and Mr. Gaurav Bainsla, Advocates for respondent no.2 with respondent no. 2 in person.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 19.08.2025

¶11

The petitioner herein seeks quashing of an FIR No. 280/2021 dated 04.06.2021, lodged at Police Station Amar Colony, and all other consequential proceedings for offences under Sections 354A, 354D and 509 of IPC on the basis of compromise between the parties.

¶12

The complainant/Respondent No.2, submitted a written complaint alleging having received vulgar messages on Instagram/social media apps. Based on the said complaint the FIR in question was registered and investigation ensued.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have settled

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

CRL.M.C. 5200/2025

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 08/09/2025 at 12:30:32

¶18

the dispute which arose out of some inter se misunderstanding. He relies on the judgment rendered in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. , (2012) 10 SCC 303 , to submit that the FIR and all consequential proceedings deserve to be quashed.

¶19

Learned APP states, under instructions of the IO, that the compromise between the complainant and the petitioner herein is indeed genuine and this court may proceed accordingly.

¶20

In the aforesaid backdrop, heard and perused the case file.

¶21

The complainant is also present in Court with her counsel.

¶22

The complainant is a well educated lady and serving as a Pilot in Air India. She is fully conscious of her rights and capable of taking decisions. 8. On a query put to her, she candidly submits that she has arrived at a settlement on her own volition to move on in life and live peacefully. There has been no coercion or duress of any kind on her to enter into the compromise.

¶23

She submits that certain misunderstanding led to the invocation of the harsh offences attracting Sections 354A, 354D and 509 of IPC and subsequently, realizing the adverse consequences thereof, it has been mutually decided to sort out the differences and thus the compromise.

¶24

In view of the above, and applying the ratio laid down in Gian Singh (supra), it is 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. Allowing criminal proceedings to continue in light of the compromise would be an abuse of the process of law.

¶25

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. FIR No. 280/2021 dated

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

CRL.M.C. 5200/2025

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

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 08/09/2025 at 12:30:32

¶30

04.06.2021, lodged at Police Station Amar Colony, and all other consequential proceedings for offences under Sections 354A, 354D and 509 of IPC, against the petitioner is hereby quashed.

¶31

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

¶32

ARUN MONGA, J

¶33

AUGUST 19, 2025 kd

¶34

Page 3 of 3

¶35

CRL.M.C. 5200/2025

¶36

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 08/09/2025 at 12:30:32

Sonak Shaurya v. the State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonak Shaurya v. the State of NCT of Delhi

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

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.

Arvind Kumar and Others Vs the State and Another

Alok Vs State

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