Jitender Singh Alias Babbu and Ors. Vs the State (Nct ) of Delhi and Anr.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Raj Kumar @ Rajan Verma is also one of the accused in the FIR and settlement has taken place between him and the complainant, and therefore, seeks permission to implead him as petitioner no.4.

¶22

The application is allowed. Amended memo of parties is taken on record.

¶23

CRL.M.C. 5733/2024 & CRL.M.A. 21885/2024 EXEMPTION FROM FILING COMPLETE CHARGE-SHEET

¶24

This petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeks quashing of FIR NO.279/2019 Under Sections 419/420/465/467/468/471/120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at P.S. K.N. Katju Marg, and all proceedings arising therefrom pursuant to a settlement between the parties.

¶25

The FIR was registered on the complaint of Shri Rajeev Ghai, alleging that he was induced and cheated by various accused persons to transfer approximately ₹18,65,500/- to various bank accounts under false promises. Initially, the FIR named other persons; however, during investigation, the present petitioners Jitender Singh @ Babbu, Robin Mathew, and Vikky Dhawan were also arrayed as accused

¶26

CRL.M.C. 5733/2024 Page 2 of 5

¶27

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 1.07.2025 18:03:02

¶28

based on the investigation.

¶29

During the pendency of the proceedings, the petitioners and the complainant/Respondent No.2 entered into two settlement agreements dated 27.06.2024 and 13.09.2024. As per the terms, the petitioners agreed to pay a total sum of ₹8,00,000/- (₹2,00,000/- each by way of Demand Draft) to the complainant. Copies of the settlement deed dated 27.06.2024 is annexed as Annexure P4 and settlement dated 13.09.2024 is annexed as Annexure A2 .

¶30

Petitioner nos. 1 to 4 and respondent no.2 are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their counsel as well as by the Investigating Officers SI Sumit, P.S. Spl. Staff Rohini and Insp. Dinesh, P.S.Cyber NW.

¶31

Respondent No.2 submits that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners without any pressure and confirms receipt of the settlement amount. He states that he has no objection to quashing of FIR No. 279/2019 and all consequential proceedings against the petitioners.

¶32

Learned APP states that petitioners have duped respondent no.2 and are involved in another case of cheating based on same modus operandi.

¶33

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

¶34

CRL.M.C. 5733/2024 Page 3 of 5

¶35

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 1.07.2025 18:03:02

¶36

"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."

¶37

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. 279/2019 Under Sections 419/420/465/467/468/471/120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at P.S. K.N. Katju Marg,and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom qua the present petitioners.

¶38

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and FIR NO. 279/2019 Under Sections 419/420/465/467/468/471/120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at P.S. K.N. Katju Marg, along with the charge sheet and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom qua the present petitioners only are hereby quashed subject to petitioners depositing a cost of Rs.10,000/- each with the Delhi Legal Services Authority within a period of one month.

¶39

CRL.M.C. 5733/2024 Page 4 of 5

¶40

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 1.07.2025 18:03:02

¶41