Petition to quash a cyber fraud FIR (visa scam) against the sister of the main accused after settlement with complainant and partial refund. The court relied on Gian Singh and quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~18
SHAMA PARVEEN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. S.M. Hashmi and Mr. Junaid Alam, Advocates.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Richa Dhawan, APP for State with SI Tej Singh Rathee and HC Parveen.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
O R D E R % 12.11.2025
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 27/11/2025 at 14:58:35
main accused, who met the complainant’s daughter through Jeevansathi.com and informed her that he works in a company based in Dubai which provides visas. He assured her that he can get Dubai Visas issued for her and her family members and demanded Rs.70,000/- per person for the same. The victim (complainant’s daughter) paid him a total amount of Rs.4,31,000- on behalf of her and her family members. One of the accounts in which the money was transferred belongs to the petitioner herein. When the victim did not get the visas, she contacted the Dubai company, which informed that the petitioner’s brother (main accused) only worked there for a period of one and half years on a temporary basis and upon receiving such information, the complainant’s daughter realized that she has been defrauded, which led to the registration of the present FIR.
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 27/11/2025 at 14:58:35
(SCC p. 340, para 58)
“58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.”
VIKAS MAHAJAN, J
NOVEMBER 12, 2025/ jg
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 27/11/2025 at 14:58:35
1 issue framed by the court
Whether FIR No. 0051/2022 under Sections 420/120B IPC should be quashed on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabRelied on¶8
(2012) 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Shama Parveen
State of NCT of Delhi
Respondent No. 2
Vikas Mahajan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
