Petition sought quashing of an FIR under Sections 420/34 IPC on the ground of settlement. Noting no settlement agreement, no affidavit from respondent No. 2 and non-impleadment of all accused, the Court disposed of the petition with liberty to seek compounding before the Trial Court.
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.
$~20
M/S NINANIYA ESTATES LIMITED & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Sonal Anand, Advocate. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP. Advocate for R-2 (Appearance not given).
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN O R D E R % 02.04.2026
PRATEEK JALAN, J
APRIL 2, 2026 ‘Bhupi/JM’/
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 06/04/2026 at 10:36:53
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the FIR registered under Sections 420/34 IPC should be quashed on the ground of settlement.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/S Ninaniya Estates Limited & Ors.
State of NCT of Delhi
Respondent No. 2
Prateek Jalan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
