Surender @ Pappu & Ors v. State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors

J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶1Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No.290/2023 dated 05.05.2023, registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, Delhi, for commission of offences under Sections 308/323/506/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶2The abovesaid FIR was registered on the basis of complaint lodged by one Mr. Pawan Sharma (respondent No.2 herein), in which he claimed that he used to run a food cafe. He revealed that three days prior to the incident in question, there was some scuffle between his employee-Daljinder Singh and his son-Yogesh (respondent No.3 herein) with one Rahul. It was in relation to the fact that Rahul (petitioner No.2 herein) had driven his scooty at a very fast speed.

¶3According to complainant-Mr. Pawan Sharma, on 05.05.2023, Rahul and his father-Surender, started abusing him and gave blow with a wooden danda on his head. When his son Yogesh came for his rescue, Rahul picked up a pipe and gave blows with such pipe on the head of Yogesh. The other two accused persons i.e. Akash (petitioner No.4 herein) and Sumit (petitioner No.3 herein)

CRL.M.C. 3411/2026 2

also hurled stones and bricks upon them. There are, in all, four accused persons.

¶4Charge-sheet has already been filed and the case is at the stage of prosecution evidence.

¶5The quashing is, however, being sought as the matter, in the interregnum, has been amicably settled between the parties. They refer to Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed in January, 2026.

¶6All the co-accused persons including accused Rahul and his father are present in Court. Both the injured persons i.e. Mr. Pawan Sharma and his son Mr.Yogesh Pandit are also present.

¶7As per such MoU, the disputes between both the parties have been amicably resolved and such resolution is without any fear, coercion, pressure, force or influence or monetary consideration.

¶8When asked, respondent Nos.2 & 3 reiterated that since the matters have been amicably resolved, they would have 'no objection' to the quashing of FIR in question.

¶9Admittedly, MLCs also reveal simple injuries.

¶10Both the sides are, reportedly, residents of the same locality and the amicable settlement is also for the purpose to ensure that there is complete harmony between them and peace in the neighbourhood.

¶11Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303. They also refer to Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr., (2014) 6 SCC 466, wherein the Apex Court has observed that proceedings, even in non-compoundable cases, can be quashed on the basis of settlement provided that the Court is satisfied that there was no meaningful purpose in continuing with the proceedings, and that the scope of conviction was remote and bleak.

¶12Reference be made to Antonnette Promilla Fernanadez v. State NCT of

CRL.M.C. 3411/2026 3

Delhi and Another 2026 SCC OnLine Del 809, Mohd. Rashid & Ors. v. The State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. 2025 SCC OnLine Del 8465, Manoj Kumar & Ors. v. State & Anr. 2016:DHC:2419, Afzal@Afjal@Dabloo& Ors. v. State of Nct Delhi & Anr. (CRL.M.C. 4756/2022, Del. HC) and Mahender Singh @ Sunny & Anr. v. The State & Ors. 2021:DHC:978, wherein this Court quashed the proceedings concerning offences, inter alia, Section 308/34 IPC in view of the amicable settlement between the parties.

¶13Keeping in mind the aforesaid and in order to facilitate both the sides in maintaining and restoring cordiality, the proceedings deserve to be quashed in exercise of the inherent powers of the Court. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, it is deemed appropriate to quash all the FIR.

¶14Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.290/2023 dated

05.05.2023, registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, Delhi, for commission of offences under Sections 308/323/506/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed.

¶15Memorandum of Understanding and original affidavits of the parties, copies of which have been filed with the present petition, shall be submitted before the learned Trial Court within four weeks from today, so that these become part of Trial Court Record.

¶16The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶17Pending application also stands disposed of.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

SEPTEMBER 1, 2026/sw/sa

CRL.M.C. 3411/2026 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 1st September, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC010192172026 + CRL.M.C. 3411/2026&CRL.M.A. 13778/2026 SURENDER @ PAPPU & ORS. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Lokesh Yadav with Mr. Siddharth Rana, Advocates with petitioners. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Richa Dhawan, APP with SI Lokender. R-2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN