Disposed

Qutbuddin and Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC14 May 2026CRL.M.C./3810/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of FIR for trespass offences after amicable settlement with the informant. The informant confirmed the settlement through video-conferencing; the court invoked inherent powers and quashed the FIR with all consequential proceedings, subject to depositing costs.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.32/2021 PS Shaheen Bagh under Sections 447/34 IPC and consequential proceedings quashed, subject to deposit of Rs.20,000 cost.

Qutbuddin and Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~86

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 14^th May, 2026

¶4

- CRL.M.C. 3810/2026 & CRL.M.A. 15447-15448/2026

¶5

QUTBUDDIN AND ORS .....Petitioners

¶6

Through: Mr. Maroof Ahmad with Mr. Heena Parveen, Advocates with petitioners in person.

¶7

versus

¶8

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for the State with SI Manoj Kumar, PS Shaheen Bagh. Respondent No.2 through V.C.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

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

¶11

Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No.32/2021 dated 09.02.2021, registered at Police Station Shaheen Bagh, for commission of offences under Sections 447/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶12

One Lalji Chaudhary was having a jhuggi on a vacant plot situated at H-11, Khasra No.479, Shram Vihar, Shaheen Bagh, New Delhi. According to him, he was residing there for the last ten years and, on 08.02.2021, accused persons came there and asked him to leave, claiming that the plot belonged to them. Later on, when somebody informed the police about the abovesaid incident, the FIR in question was registered.

¶13

Charge-sheet has already been filed against eight accused persons and the learned Trial Court has taken cognizance for commission of offences

¶14

Signature Not Verified

¶15

CRL.M.C. 3810/2026

¶16

¶17

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 6.05.2026 12:30:08

¶18

under Sections 427/447/452/34 IPC.

¶19

The matter has, reportedly, been settled and, therefore, quashing is being sought. 5. Copy of Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 21.04.2026 has been placed on record and as per the settlement terms, the abovesaid FIR was got registered on account of some misunderstanding and the parties have settled their disputes amicably with the intervention of respectable persons and respondent No.2 i.e. informant has no objection if the FIR is quashed. 6. Respondent No. 2 has joined the proceedings through video-conferencing and has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer. 7. When asked, respondent No.2 reiterated the terms of settlement and submits that the abovesaid plot belongs to Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and he has already removed his own jhuggi from there. He also states that he has entered into the abovesaid settlement out of his own free will, without any coercion and influence from any corner whatsoever and therefore, he would have ‘ no objection ’ if FIR in question is quashed.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioners have not made any further trespass into the abovesaid plot of land. He, on instructions, submits that even the petitioners have no concern with such plot and are not in its possession, either and since the matter has been amicably settled, FIR in question may be quashed.

¶21

The Investigating Officer is present in Court and when asked, he submitted that the land belongs to DDA and during investigation, such fact was brought to the notice of DDA. 10. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose.

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

CRL.M.C. 3810/2026

¶24

¶25

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 6.05.2026 12:30:08

¶26

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 FIR.

¶27

Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.32/2021 dated 09.02.2021, registered at Police Station Shaheen Bagh, for commission of offences under Sections 447/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is, hereby, quashed subject to petitioners depositing total cost of Rs. 20,000/- with NDBA Members Welfare fund Account [Acc No. 18580110013847, IFSC Code UCBA0001858, UCO Bank, Patiala House] within four weeks from today.

¶28

Proof of deposit of cost and Original MoU dated 21.04.2026 as well as original affidavits of the parties be submitted before the learned Trial Court. 14. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶29

Pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶30

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

¶31

MAY 14, 2026/st/sa

¶32

Signature Not Verified

¶33

CRL.M.C. 3810/2026

¶34

¶35

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 6.05.2026 12:30:08

Qutbuddin and Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Qutbuddin and Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Sehgal Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Sahil Saleem Khan Vs State NCT of Delhi

State through Office Director General of Prisons Vs Rahul Alias Kala and Anr.

M/S Techrina Telecom Vs Ravi and Singh Communication

Rakesh R Pandey Vs Ravi and Singh Communication

Ms. Shama Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.