Vikram Singh v. State NCT of Delhi and Ors

J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶1Petitioner herein seeks quashing of FIR No. 312/2025 dated

16.07.2025, registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, Delhi, for commission of offences under Sections 290/106(1) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (BNS), 2023 (corresponding Sections 288/304A IPC), along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶2As per the allegations appearing in abovesaid FIR, construction work was being carried out at House No. H-16/ 1796, Sangam Vihar, New Delhi. The contract with respect to abovesaid construction had been given to Hakesh (father of Raju Kumar-respondent No.2). FIR is based upon the report lodged by Raju Kumar, who claimed that plaster work was to be carried out and there

CRL.M.C. 476/2026 2

was a transformer in front of the abovesaid property and despite the fact that they had apprised the owner of the house that there is a chance of electrocution because of the close proximity of the abovesaid transformer, they were asked to complete the work. When Gauri Shankar (deceased herein) climbed over, he came in contact of the transformer, which resulted in his getting electrocuted. He was, immediately, taken to hospital where he, unfortunately, died.

¶3As per the allegations, the incident had taken place as the owner of the property had not taken requisite steps and had not provided any safety equipment to the workers.

¶4Charge-sheet has yet not been filed and the matter is under investigation.

¶5Fact, however, remains that the quashing is being sought for the reason that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and have entered into comprehensive Settlement Deed dated 10.11.2025.

¶6Copy of such Settlement Deed has also been placed on record.

¶7The settlement is with the legal representatives of the deceased worker.

¶8The affidavits of informant Raju Kumar and legal representatives of the deceased worker are on record and they have 'no objection' to quashing of FIR in question.

¶9When the present petition was taken up by this Court on 23.07.2026, the following facts were recorded:- "1. The unfortunate incident in question led to the death of one Mr. Gauri Shankar Thakur. The settlement has now taken place between his surviving LRs and the accused.

¶2On the last date, when the matter was taken up, the prosecution was directed to verify about the details of surviving LRs.

¶3Fact, however, remains that such report has still not been furnished.

¶4Learned counsel for parties submit that the deceased is survived by his widow and one minor child. Such widow-Rekha Devi is

CRL.M.C. 476/2026 3

present in Court.

¶5The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Raju and he is also present in Court. The Court has made queries from him and he states that he would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR. He, admittedly, did not suffer any injury in the incident in question. He would be at liberty to join the proceedings through video-conferencing.

¶6Let the verification report be filed by police by the next date of hearing and the financial capacity of the accused be also assessed and the report to that effect be also furnished.

¶7Learned counsel for petitioner, however, in all fairness, submits that, without prejudice to their rights and contentions, they are ready to hand over the settlement amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- by way of demand draft to the widow of Mr. Gauri Shankar Thakur. Such Demand Draft has been received by her in the presence of her counsel and she also reiterates that she has, voluntarily, entered into settlement with the petitioner and would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR. She would also be at liberty to join the proceedings through video-conferencing on the next date of hearing.

¶8List on 25.08.2026."

¶10In terms of the abovesaid direction, a verification report has been submitted, indicating about the financial capacity of the accused i.e. petitioner herein. Details of LRs have also been verified.

¶11Respondent No.3 is present in-person today also and has been identified by IO as well by her counsel.

¶12When asked, respondent No.3 reiterated the term of settlement as recorded in Settlement Deed dated 10.11.2025 and submits that such settlement has been arrived at out of her own free will and volition, without any coercion and undue influence from any corner whatsoever. She states that she has already received the settlement amount of Rs.2,50,000/- and would have "no objection' to the quashing of FIR in question. During course of arguments, petitioner has, however, made another payment of Rs. 50,000/- to respondent No.3 by way of cheque of even date, drawn on Punjab National Bank, in her name.

¶13The copy, thereof, has been retained on record.

CRL.M.C. 476/2026 4

¶14Petitioner, who is present in Court, assures that the cheque would be duly honoured, on its presentation.

¶15In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.

¶16Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 312/2025 dated

16.07.2025, registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, Delhi, for commission of offences under Sections 290/106(1) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (BNS), 2023 (corresponding Sections 288/304A IPC), along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, quashed.

¶17Settlement Deed dated 10.11.2025 and original affidavits of the parties, copies of which have been placed on record in the present proceedings, shall be submitted to the concerned SHO/I.O. within four weeks from today.

¶18The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

AUGUST 25, 2026/sw/sa

CRL.M.C. 476/2026 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 25thAugust, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC011090082025 + CRL.M.C. 476/2026 VIKRAM SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Chaturvedi, Ms. Vatsalya, Advocates along with petitioner. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP with SI Rahul. Ms. Khushboo Chaudhary, Mr. Rahul Maurya, Advocates for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN