Vinod Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Vinod Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of FIR No. 260/2016 of PS Jahangirpuri (offences under Sections 354/354A/354D/509/506/323 IPC) and of all proceedings arising out of it.

Issue for consideration

Whether case FIR No. 260/2016 of PS Jahangirpuri (offences under Sections 354/354A/354D/509/506/323 IPC) and proceedings arising therefrom should be quashed in view of the compromise between petitioner Vinod and the de facto complainant, respondent no. 2.

Court's answer

Having spoken with the parties in Hindi and considering the circumstances - the compromise between them, that both are now married and settled in their respective families and no longer reside in the same locality, respondent no. 2's stated unwillingness to pursue the prosecution (the petitioner having never contacted her after registration of the FIR), and the petitioner's expressed remorse - the court was satisfied that it would be in the interest of justice not to push the parties through trial.

Ratio / Principle

Accordingly, the petition was allowed and FIR No. 260/2016 of PS Jahangirpuri for offence under Section 354/354A/354D/509/506/323 IPC, as well as all proceedings arising out of it, stand quashed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Girish Kathpalia, Judge; oral judgment dated 01.09.2025) allowed CRL.M.C. 6143/2025 moved by petitioner Vinod for quashing of FIR No. 260/2016, PS Jahangirpuri, registered for offences under Sections 354, 354A, 354D, 509, 506 and 323 IPC. The underlying incident occurred in 2016 when the petitioner and respondent no. 2 (the de facto complainant) were unmarried neighbours; both have since married and settled in their respective families, the petitioner never contacted respondent no. 2 after registration of the FIR, she stated she does not wish to pursue his prosecution, and the petitioner expressed remorse. The learned APP submitted the State had no serious objection. Satisfied that pushing the parties through trial would not be in the interest of justice, the court quashed the FIR and all proceedings arising out of it. No precedents cited; single-issue quashing matter based on compromise.

$~68

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 01.09.2025

CRL.M.C. 6143/2025 & CRL.M.A. 26091/2025 VINOD .....Petitioner Through: Counsel for petitioner (appearance not given) with petitioner in person versus

THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State with SI Jeetendra Kumar, PS Jahangirpuri Mr. Baldev Sharan and Mr. H.S. Mehta, Advocate for R2 with respondent no. 2 in person

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

Petitioner seeks quashing of case FIR No. 260/2016 of PS Jahangirpuri for offence under Section 354/354A/354D/509/506/323 IPC on the ground that the complainant de facto ( respondent no.2 ) has compromised the disputes with the petitioner.

Respondent no. 2 present with her counsel and identified by IO/SI Jitender Kumar accepts notice. Learned APP accepts notice and submits that State has no serious objection to this petition.

CRL.M.C.6143/2025

Page 1 of 2 pages

GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2025.09.01 17:54:53 -07'00'

I have spoken with the parties in Hindi. It appears that in the year 2016 when petitioner and respondent no. 2 were not married and were neighbours, the incident took place which led to registration of the subject FIR. It is submitted by them that now they are not residing in the same locality as both of them have got married and are settled in their respective families. Respondent no. 2 specifically submits that after registration of the subject FIR, petitioner has never tried to contact her and now she does not wish to pursue his prosecution. Petitioner expresses remorse on his conduct.

Considering the above circumstances and having spoken with the parties, I am satisfied that it would be in the interest of justice not to push the parties through trial.

Therefore, the petition is allowed and the FIR No. 260/2016 of PS Jahangirpuri for offence under Section 354/354A/354D/ 509/506/323 IPC as well as proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE)

SEPTEMBER 01, 2025/ as

CRL.M.C.6143/2025

Page 2 of 2 pages