Vinod Bansal Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

¶1

$~26

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 270/2026 & CRL.M.A. 1009/2026

¶4

VINOD BANSAL .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, Adv. alongwith the petitioner

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State with Mr. Bhuman Bansal, Adv. Mr. Raj Kumar, Adv. for R-2 SI- Sagar Yadav, PS: Vivek Vihar

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶9

O R D E R % 10.02.2026

¶10

By virtue of the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( Cr.P.C ) [now Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS )], the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR No.1010/2015 dated 15.10.2015 registered at PS: Vivek Vihar, Delhi under Sections 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ) and all proceedings emanating therefrom since the amount which was allegedly duped from respondent no.2 has already been reverted back to him by the petitioner herein.

¶11

Issue notice.

¶12

Learned APP for the State accepts notice and submits that he has no

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 12/02/2026 at 12:57:10

¶15

objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR No.1010/2015 dated 15.10.2015.

¶16

Respondent no.2, also present in Court, accepts notice and affirms the fact that the amount of Rs.1,05,00,000/- ( Rupees One Crore Five Lakhs Only ) has been received by him from the petitioner herein and the dispute between the parties have been settled amicably. Lastly, respondent no.2 states that he has no objection to the quashing of the FIR No.1010/2015 dated 15.10.2015.

¶17

Additionally, petitioner and respondent no.2, present in Court, have been identified by the IO and their credentials, as on record, have been duly verified.

¶18

In view of the fact that the dispute(s) inter se the petitioner and respondent no.2 have been settled amicably and the full and final settlement has already been made. Both the petitioner and the respondent no.2 submit/ undertake that they shall remain bound by terms of their respective affidavit(s). As such, following the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. vs. Babita Raguvanshi & Anr. (2013) 4 SCC 58 , Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (2014) 6 SCC 466 , this Court is of the opinion that continuation of the aforesaid FIR No.1010/2015 dated 15.10.2015, will be an exercise in futility.

¶19

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.1010/2015 dated 15.10.2015 registered at PS.: Vivek Vihar, Delhi under Sections 420/34 of the IPC and all other proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

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 12/02/2026 at 12:57:10

¶22

Accordingly, the petition, alongwith pending application, is disposed of.

¶23

At this stage, both petitioner and respondent no.2 willingly, for the sake of humanity, for doing community service towards one and all, submit that they shall jointly install three water coolers (approx. 80 litres of storage each) and two water dispensers within a period of four weeks at PS: Vivek Vihar, Delhi.

¶24

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶25

FEBRUARY 10, 2026/Ab

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 12/02/2026 at 12:57:10

Vinod Bansal v. the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Bansal v. the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ompal Yadav Vs Farhan Empexo Export and Import Co.

Abhishek Singh Alias Chintu Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

MD Arif & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Vivek & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Kanchan Sharma & Anr. Vs Pranav Sharma

Kanchan Sharma & Anr. Vs Pranav Sharma