Disposed

Babu Kumar v. the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC6 May 2026CRL.M.C./2108/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross FIRs arising from a drunken scuffle between two friends were quashed under Section 528 BNSS after the parties executed an MoU settling their disputes; the court noted the young age of the accused and absence of other cases against them.

What the court decided

AI extract

Babu Kumar Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~58&14

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 06^th May, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 3496/2026&CRL.M.A. 14171/2026 SURAJ KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Advocate. versus

¶4

THE STATE (GNCTD) THROUGH SHO, PS SAGARPUR AND ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP with SI Nitesh M. Mr. R S Mishra, Advocate for R-2.

¶5

14 + CRL.M.C. 2108/2026 &CRL.M.A. 8707/2026 BABU KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. R S Mishra, Advocate. versus

¶6

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. ....Respondent Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP with SI Nitesh M. Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Advocate for R-2.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶8

Both these petitions, being connected, are taken up together.

¶9

Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIRs i.e. cross FIR Nos.280/2019 and 281/2019, both dated 26.06.2019, registered at Police Station Sagarpur, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived between them.

¶10

Copies of abovesaid FIRs are on record.

¶11

As per allegations appearingin FIR No. 280/2019,complainant-Suraj Kumar had gone to the premises of his Company situated at Kailash Puri on 25.06.2019.He called his friend Babu Kumar there. They both took drinks

¶12

Signature Not Verified

¶13

Digitally Signed CRL.M.C. 3496/2026 &CRL.M.C. 2108/2026 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 8.05.2026 11:35:44

¶14

together and, thereafter, some altercation took place and they both started abusing each other. According to Suraj Kumar, his friend Babu Kumar took out a knife from his pocket and attacked him with such knife. On account of such attack, he received injuries on his hand and on his neck. Though, the abovesaid case was, initially, registered for commission of offence under Section 308 IPC, later on, Section 307 IPC was also added. The abovesaid case is, presently, at the stage of final arguments.

¶15

As regards FIR No. 281/2019, which has been lodged at the instance of complainant-Babu Kumar, both of them took drinks together and, thereafter, there was a quarrel between them and as per Babu Kumar, Suraj Kumar picked up a brick from the spot and hit himwith the abovesaid brick on his head, which resulted injuries to him. The abovesaid case has been registered for offences under Sections 323/341 IPC. However, the charges were framed for commission of offences under Sections 324/341 IPC and the case is at the stage of Prosecution Evidence.

¶16

Both the parties i.e. Babu Kumar and Suraj Kumar are present in Court and have also been identified by the IO, who is also present in Court. 7. When asked, they both claimedthat they are close friends andcome from same village situated in Muzzafarpur, Bihar. They submit that they are residing in some neighbourhood of Sagarpur and on that day, they had consumed alcohol and under the influence of alcohol, they quarreled and scuffled with each other.In such process, the empty alcohol bottle got broken and during scuffle, they had fallen upon the pieces of such broken glass bottle,which resulted in injuries.

¶17

A comprehensive Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) has been drawn on 11.12.2026 which is signed by both of them. In such MoU, both the

¶18

CRL.M.C. 3496/2026 &CRL.M.C. 2108/2026 2

¶19

Signature Not Verified

¶20

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 8.05.2026 11:35:44

¶21

parties have stated that they have entered into abovesaid settlement with their own free-willand without any pressure, force, coercion and undue influence from any corner whatsoever, and that they do not want to proceed with their respective cases and would have ‘ no objection ’if their respective FIRs are quashed.

¶22

The incident in question dates back to year 2019 and when asked, IO informed that there is no other case of any nature whatsoever against either of them.

¶23

Both the parties are young offenders in their twenties and feel apologetic for the incident in question.

¶24

They both reiterate the terms of the settlement as recorded in the abovesaid MoU and submit that the Affidavit-cum-No Objection Certificates have been prepared as per their specific instructions. They also submit that they want to ensure that their friendship does not get effect in future, and with that intent in mind, they are not interested in pursuing with the abovesaid FIRs and reliance is placed on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303.

¶25

Reference be made to the following observations made in Antonnette Promilla Fernanadez v. State NCT of Delhi and Another 2026 SCC OnLine Del 809:-

¶26

"15. It is now well settled that, even in the case of non-compoundable offences, the High Court may exercise inherent powers, recognised by Section 482 of the CrPC and Section 528 of the BNSS, to quash proceedings based on a compromise between the parties. However, the aforesaid power is discretionary, and certain principles have been laid down, which guide the Court in adjudicating an application of this nature.”

¶27

Reference be also made to Mohd. Umair@Umer v. State (Govt NCT of

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

CRL.M.C. 3496/2026 &CRL.M.C. 2108/2026 3

¶30

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 8.05.2026 11:35:44

¶31

Delhi) And Ors And Anr. (in CRL.M.C.674/2021; DoD 12.03.2021) , wherein this Court, after considering the nature of the offence, young age of the accused and amicable settlement between the parties, quashed the proceedings in relation to offence under Section 307 IPC.

¶32

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose.

¶33

Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIRs.

¶34

Consequently, to secure the ends of justiceof cross FIR Nos.280/2019 and 281/2019, both dated 26.06.2019, registered at Police Station Sagarpur, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are, hereby, quashed.

¶35