$~71 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 18th September, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC010444202026 + CRL.M.C. 6914/2026 SAGAR SINGH @ AMIT @ ZIBRA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Lalit Kumar and Ms. Priyanka Dagar, Advocates with petitioner Nos.2, 3 & 4 in person and mother of petitioner No.1 versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State with SI Gajender Singh, PS Bindapur. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) CRL.M.A. 28974/2026 (exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 6914/2026 1. Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No.477/2019 dated 18.06.2019, registered at P.S. Binda Pur, for commission of offences under Sections 308/324/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 2. The abovesaid FIR was registered on the basis of report lodged by Jaswant @ Bunty (respondent No.2 herein). According to him, he and his younger brother Rajender Verma (respondent No.3 herein) were into the business of furniture and used to work in Uttam Vihar area. On 17.06.2019 at about 10 pm, when his brother was returning home after doing some work, a scuffle took place between him and the accused Inderjit @ Nikki (petitioner No.2 herein). Rajender Verma called up his brother Jaswant @ Bunty, who also reached the spot. Thereafter, they both were assaulted by all the accused persons, who were carrying weapons also. Jaswant @ Bunty and Rajender Verma received injuries and were rushed to hospital. It was in the abovesaid factual matrix that FIR was registered and, eventually, all the accused were charge-sheeted for offences under Sections 308/324/34 IPC. 3. Charges have already been framed. The case is at the stage of trial. 4. Quashing is being sought for the reason that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. 5. Both the sides have entered into a comprehensive Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 06.09.2026 and have been able to resolve all their disputes. 6. Copies of MLCs of both the injured are on record, which indicate that the injuries were simple and blunt in nature. Neither of them had received any injuries, with any sharp object. 7. Both the injured i.e. respondent Nos.2 and 3 are present in Court and have been identified by the Investigating Officer, who is present in Court. 8. When asked, they both reiterated the terms of settlement. They also submitted that they have already received compensation towards the expenditure which they had incurred on their injuries and treatment and they are no longer interested in pursuing with the present FIR. They also submit that all accused have apologized to them and in order to maintain peace and harmony, they have already forgiven them. They state that they have entered into the abovesaid settlement out of their own free will, without any coercion and influence from any corner whatsoever and therefore, they would have ‘no objection’ if FIR in question is quashed. 9. Keeping in mind the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the parties have amicably settled their disputes, this Court is of the considered view that the continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. 10. Reference be also made to Antonnette Promilla Fernanadez v. State NCT of 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. 11. In Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr., (2014) 6 SCC 466, 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. Reference be also made to the decision of Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303. 12. 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. 13. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.477/2019 dated 18.06.2019, registered at P.S. Binda Pur, for commission of offences under Sections 308/324/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is, hereby, quashed, subject to petitioners’ depositing a cost of Rs. 10,000/- each with Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within four weeks from today. Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 06.09.2026 and Original affidavits, copies of which have been placed on record in the present proceedings, shall be submitted before the learned Trial Court within further two weeks, so that these become part of Trial Court Record. 14. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. (MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE SEPTEMBER 18, 2026/st/js CRL.M.C.6914/2026 1