✦ High Court of India · 11 Aug 2025

Mr. Anand Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate with v. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI ORS

Case Details High Court of India · 11 Aug 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
11 Aug 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,030 words

W.P.(CRL) 2477/2025 Page 1 of 4$~67 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(CRL) 2477/2025 SATISH KUMAR & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Anand Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate with petitioners in person. versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC (Criminal) with Mr. Arjit Sharma and Ms. Sakshi Jha, Advocates. ASI Devender, PS Aman Vihar. Respondent no. 2/ Complainant in person. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGAO R D E R% 11.08.20251.Petitioners herein seek quashing of an FIR No. 86/2023 dated 09.02.2023 for the alleged offences under Sections 324(Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation) and 34 (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of a common intention) of IPC, registered at Police Station Aman Vihar, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise between the parties. 2.Briefly speaking, the case set up by the Complainant/Respondent No.2 is that on 08.02.2023, after attending a wedding function with his neighbours Satish (Petitioner no.1) and Bhura (Petitioner no.2), a quarrel arose between the parties when they mocked the complainant for being 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 08/09/2025 at 12:20:59 W.P.(CRL) 2477/2025 Page 2 of 4drunk. In the course of the fight, one of them assaulted him with a sharp cutter on his right forearm and threatened to kill him. His sister-in-law Baby Devi (Respondent No.3), who tried to intervene, also sustained injuries. Subsequently, the aforesaid FIR was registered against all the petitioners. 3.Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties are well acquainted to each other and that the allegations were levelled against the Petitioners in the heat of the moment. He further submits that the parties, of their own volition and without any coercion or undue influence have now amicably resolved all their disputes vide a settlement deed dated 31.07.2025 with a view to restore cordial relations. 4.Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that, in view of the compromise between the parties, Respondent No.2/Complainant is not inclined to press charges against the petitioner and proceed further in the matter. He, therefore, urges that the impugned FIR and all consequential proceedings may be quashed based on the compromise. 5.Parties are present in person before the Court. Upon interacting with them, it appears that the real dispute has indeed been settled amicably. On a query put to the complainant, he submits that at the relevant time, when he made the allegations in the aforesaid FIR, he did not realize the adverse consequences thereof. 5.1He further states that the petitioners are his close friends and invariably sit together to enjoy their drinks. That on the evening of the incident they were all in extra high spirits, which led to a scuffle and cross-fight amongst the friends, resulting in the unsavoury incident of registration of the FIR. 5.2As regards the injuries, he submits that they were minor in nature and 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 08/09/2025 at 12:20:59 W.P.(CRL) 2477/2025 Page 3 of 4he has no grievance qua the same so as to continue with the criminal proceedings. 6.The Complainant/Respondent No.2 submits that he regrets having leveled such allegations against his friends. He has also affirmed, without any coercion or duress, that he no longer wishes to pursue the charges and supports the quashing of the FIR in order to live peacefully in posterity and enjoy the inter se cordiality with each other. 7.In response to a court query, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2/Complainant and the learned APP concur with the fact of compromise and submit that, in view of the compromise, they have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. 8.In view of the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent no.2. 9.Having perused the FIR and the case file, even otherwise, it is debatable whether the ingredients of the alleged offences, as per the penal sections invoked in the FIR, are made out. 10.Given that the dispute has been resolved, continuing with criminal proceedings may serve no useful purpose. It would be a drain on judicial resources and abuse of the process of law, especially when dispute does not involve any public interest or interest of the society at large. Continuation of the proceedings, on the other hand, may result in hostility between the parties and defeat the very purpose of the settlement. 11.Quashing the FIR would rather facilitate the parties in maintaining or restoring cordiality. Therefore, the proceedings deserve to be quashed in the exercise of the inherent powers of the Court. Reference may be had to the judgement rendered in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 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 08/09/2025 at 12:20:59 W.P.(CRL) 2477/2025 Page 4 of 4SCC 303] in this context. 12.In view of the above, and applying the ratio laid down in Gian Singh(supra), it is deemed just and appropriate to invoke the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS to prevent undue hardship to the parties and promote mutual goodwill and societal harmony. 13.Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. FIR No. 86/2023 dated 09.02.2023, lodged at Police Station Aman Vihar, and all other consequential proceedings for offences under Sections 324, 506 and 34 of IPC, against the petitioners are hereby quashed. 14.The petition, along with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. ARUN MONGA, JAUGUST 11, 2025 rs/kd

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments