Allowed¶23

Sonali Yadav v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC2 Feb 2026CRL.M.C./844/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRL.M.C. 844/2026; Sonali Yadav v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.; High Court of Delhi; quashing of FIR on settlement/MoU; S. 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023; FIR No. 54/2021 dated 02.03.2021; Ss. 186/353/323/427 IPC; P.S. I.P. Estate, Central Delhi; MoU dated 12.01.2026; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466; State no objection; exercise in futility; peace and harmony; Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J.; decided 02.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Case FIR No. 54/2021 dated 02.03.2021 registered under sections 186/353/323/427 IPC at P.S.: I.P. Estate, Central Delhi quashed; all proceedings arising therefrom closed; petition and pending applications disposed-of. ¶23

Sonali Yadav Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether case FIR No. 54/2021 dated 02.03.2021 registered under sections 186/353/323/427 IPC at P.S.: I.P. Estate, Central Delhi ought to be quashed under section 528 BNSS 2023 in view of the amicable settlement (MoU dated 12.01.2026) between the petitioner and respondent No. 2.

¶13

Court's answer

In line with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466, the court saw no reason why the subject FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom should not be quashed, given the settlement between the contesting parties.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

In light of the settlement between the contesting parties, continuing with the subject FIR and all subsequent proceedings would be an exercise in futility and would not be conducive to peace and harmony between the parties.

¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of FIR on amicable settlement — Petition under S. 528 BNSS 2023 sought quashing of FIR No. 54/2021 dated 02.03.2021 (Ss. 186/353/323/427 IPC, P.S.: I.P. Estate, Central Delhi). Petitioner and respondent No. 2 executed MoU dated 12.01.2026 resolving all issues amicably; petition supported by their affidavits and ID proofs. Parties appeared in court, credentials verified and identified by counsel; on interaction they confirmed the settlement. Learned APP for the State confirmed no objection to quashing. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, the court held that continuance of the FIR after settlement would be an exercise in futility and not conducive to peace and harmony. FIR and all proceedings arising therefrom quashed/closed; petition and pending applications disposed-of (Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J., 02.02.2026).

¶1

$~73

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 844/2026

¶4

SONALI YADAV .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Anubhav Dubey with Mr. Schidanand Choudhary, Advocates Petitioner in-person

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

¶7

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for the State. R2 in-person.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 02.02.2026

¶9

CRL.M.A. 3337/2026

¶10

Exemption granted, subject to just exceptions.

¶11

The application stands disposed-of.

¶12

CRL.M.C. 844/2026

¶13

By way of the present petition filed under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the petitioner seeks quashing of case FIR No. 54/2021 dated 02.03.2021 registered under sections 186/353/323/427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) at P.S.: I.P. Estate, Central Delhi.

¶14

The petition is premised on a Memorandum of Understanding (‘MoU’) dated 12.01.2026, whereby the petitioner and respondent No. 2 have resolved the matter amicably.

¶15

The petition is also supported by affidavits of the petitioner and of respondent No. 2, alongwith proof of their IDs.

¶16

CRL.M.C. 844/2026

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

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 16/02/2026 at 12:24:21

¶19

The contesting parties are present in court. Their credentials have been verified and they have also been identified by their respective counsel.

¶20

The court has interacted with respondent No.2, as well as with the petitioner, who have confirmed that they have now resolved the matter and MoU dated 12.01.2026 has been signed by them closing all issues amicably. Parties now wish to live in peace and harmony going forward.

¶21

Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, learned APP confirms that the State has no objection to the subject FIR being quashed.

¶22

In the circumstances, in line with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2012) 10 SCC 303 as also in Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466, this court sees no reason why the subject FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom should not be quashed. This court is of the view that in light of the settlement between the contesting parties, continuing with the subject FIR and all subsequent proceedings would be an exercise in futility and would not be conducive to peace and harmony between the parties.

¶23

Accordingly, case FIR No. 54/2021 dated 02.03.2021 registered under sections 186/353/323/427 IPC at P.S.: I.P. Estate, Central Delhi is quashed. All proceedings arising therefrom also stand closed.

¶24