Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR for offences under Sections 323/354/354B/509/34 IPC following amicable settlement with respondent no. 2, who received ₹1,00,000 and affirmed her free consent in court. Relying on Gian Singh, the Delhi High Court quashed the FIR and consequent proceedings and disposed of the petition.
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.
$~62
MRS REKHA TYAGI & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Ms. Aayushi Gupta and Mr. Anup Kr Das, Ms. Shweta Mehta, Mr. Kapil Tyagi and Ms. Mahima Gouri, Advs. with the petitioners in person.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anand V Khati, ASC for State with SI Bharat Singh PS Uttam Nagar. Respondent no. 2 in person.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL
O R D E R
1. The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing of FIR 874/2020 registered at Police Station - Uttam Nagar on 30.10.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 323/354/354B/509/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the brief facts of the case are that on 27.10.2020, an altercation took place between the petitioners and respondent no. 2 which led to the registration of the instant FIR by respondent no. 2 against the petitioners.
3. It is submitted that the petitioners and respondent no. 2 have now
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 13/08/2025 at 12:43:17
settled their disputes amicably and are now moving forward towards a peaceful and harmonious future.
4. It is further submitted that respondent no.2 has settled all her claims with the petitioners for a sum of ₹1,00,000/- and all disputes of any nature whatsoever, was agreed to be paid at the time of quashing of the FIR.
5. It is thus prayed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the instant FIR may be quashed on the basis of the compromise.
6. Learned APP for the State submitted that there is no opposition to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. The petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel and the Investigating Officer, Police Station Uttam Nagar. Respondent 2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel and the Investigating Officer.
9. At this juncture, petitioner no. 1 has handed over a Demand Draft bearing No.066930 for the balance amount of ₹1,00,000/- dated 06.08.2025 in the name of respondent no.2 today in the Court. Respondent no. 2 has verified the particulars of the Demand Draft to her satisfaction and stated them to be correct.
10. On a query made by this Court, respondent no. 2 has categorically stated that she has entered into this compromise on his own free will and without any pressure. It is also stated by her that the entire dispute has been amicably settled between the parties.
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 13/08/2025 at 12:43:17
11. Copy of the Settlement dated 13.01.2025 is on record and has been annexed as Annexure P3. On the basis of this deed, respondent no. 2 has agreed to withdraw the quash the instant FIR against the petitioners. Affidavit of respondent no. 2, stating her no objection, is also on record. 12. Keeping in view the fact that the matter stands amicably settled between the petitioners and respondent no. 2, without any pressure, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. 13. Hence, in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, FIR 874/2020 registered at Police Station - Uttam Nagar on 30.10.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 323/354/354B/509/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and all the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom, are quashed. 14. The petition, along with pending applications, if any, stands disposed of.
AJAY DIGPAUL, J
AUGUST 8, 2025 Sk/ryp
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 13/08/2025 at 12:43:17
1 issue framed by the court
Whether FIR 874/2020 under Sections 323/354/354B/509/34 IPC should be quashed on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh vs. State of PunjabRelied on¶13
(2012) 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Mrs Rekha Tyagi & Ors.
State of NCT of Delhi
Respondent No. 2
Ajay Digpaul
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
