Jamshed & Anr. v. the State of Delhi NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC12 Dec 2025CRL.M.C./8124/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR on amicable settlement/MOU between relative-parties; FIR No. 0240/2023, Sections 308/34 IPC, P.S. Kalindi Kunj; petition under Section 528 BNSS 2023; settlement dated 13.09.2025 accepted voluntarily without pressure or coercion; simple injuries, spur-of-the-moment fight among relatives; FIR and all emanating proceedings quashed; petition and pending application disposed of; Delhi High Court; CRL.M.C. 8124/2025; Justice Neena Bansal Krishna; 12.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 0240/2023 registered under Sections 308/34 IPC at P.S. Kalindi Kunj and all proceedings emanating therefrom quashed in terms of the MOU dated 13.09.2025; Petition and pending Application (CRL.M.A. 33912/2025) disposed of. ¶¶19

Jamshed & Anr. Vs the State of Delhi NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 0240/2023 registered under Sections 308/34 IPC at P.S. Kalindi Kunj and all proceedings emanating therefrom should be quashed in terms of the Settlement (MOU dated 13.09.2025) between the parties. +1 more

¶¶11

Court's answer

Since the parties amicably resolved their differences out of their own free will and without coercion, and the matter is related to relatives, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings, which would only create further acrimony; it is therefore in the interest of justice to quash the FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶¶16

Ratio / Principle

There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

¶¶17

Key takeaways

FIR No. 0240/2023 registered under Sections 308/34 IPC at P.S. Kalindin Kunj and all other proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed.ratio¶¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Neena Bansal Krishna, J, 12.12.2025) in CRL.M.C. 8124/2025: Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of FIR No. 0240/2023 (Sections 308/34 IPC, P.S. Kalindi Kunj) was disposed of with the FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom quashed. The parties, who are relatives, had amicably settled all disputes vide MOU dated 13.09.2025; they were present in person, identified by the Investigating Officer, endorsed the settlement voluntarily, supported the petition by affidavit and affirmed that the settlement was reached without any pressure or coercion. As the injuries were simple and continuing proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose and only create further acrimony between relatives, the court held it was in the interest of justice to quash the FIR, finding no legal impediment.

¶1

$~13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 8124/2025, CRL.M.A. 33912/2025

¶4

JAMSHED & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Ajit Singh Tomar, Advocate with Petitioners in person

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE OF DELHI NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State with SI Man Mohan Mr. Amiruddin Saifi, Advocate for R-2 to 4 with R-2 to 4 in person

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA O R D E R % 12.12.2025

¶9

Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed on behalf of the Petitioners for quashing of FIR No. 0240/2023 registered under Sections 308/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) at P.S. Kalindi Kunj and all other proceedings emanating therefrom, in terms of the MOU dated 13.09.2025.

¶10

It is stated that the parties are relatives and the fight took place on the spur of the moment. The injuries suffered by the parties are simple in nature. 3. The parties are present in person and are identified by the Investigating Officer.

¶11

The parties have amicably resolved their dispute vide MOU dated 13.09.2025. It is prayed that the present FIR No. 0240/2023 be quashed, in terms of the Settlement.

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 18/12/2025 at 12:12:21

¶14

The parties have endorsed the amicable settlement and accepted the terms thereof voluntarily. The parties have submitted that all the disputes have been amicably settled vide MOU dated 13.09.2025 and thus, no fruitful purpose will be served in continuing with the FIR.

¶15

The present Petition has been signed by the Petitioners and is supported by their Affidavits. The parties have reaffirmed the terms of the settlement arrived at vide MOU dated 13.09.2025 and they also submit that the said Settlement has been arrived at between the parties, without any pressure and coercion.

¶16

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 present matter is related to relatives, 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.

¶17

Moreover, there is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

¶18

Accordingly, FIR No. 0240/2023 registered under Sections 308/34 IPC at P.S. Kalindin Kunj and all other proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

¶19

The Petition alongwith pending Application, stands disposed of.

¶20

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

¶21

DECEMBER 12, 2025 N

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 18/12/2025 at 12:12:21

Jamshed & Anr. v. the State of Delhi NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jamshed & Anr. v. the State of Delhi NCT of Delhi & Ors.

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

Jaivardhan Dhawan Vs Narcotics Control Bureau

Neeraj Kumar @ Gangster Vs State NCT of Delhi

Mahesh Kumar Vs Central Bureau of Investigation through Director

Ms. Vanita Nassa Kapur Vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr.

Malti Devi and Ors. Vs NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Satpal Deshwal Vs State of NCT of Delhi