$~70
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
%					       Date of Decision: 23rd February, 2026
+ 	CRL.M.C. 1470/2026 & CRL.M.A. 5938/2026
	TUSHAR
.....Petitioner
				Through:	Mr. Anirudh Yadav, Advocate.

				versus

	THE STATE NCT OF DELHI  & ORS.
.....Respondent
Through:	Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for the State with SI Sandeep Yadav.

	CORAM:
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
				J U D G M E N T (oral)

1. Petitioner herein seeks quashing of FIR No.0004/2026 dated 06.01.2026, registered at P.S. Sector 23 Dwarka, for commission of offences under Sections 115(2)/126(2)/351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (BNS), 2023 (corresponding Sections 323/341/506 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 complaint of one Mr. Narender Sharma (respondent No.2 herein), who was posted as security guard at Akshardham Apartments, Sector 19 Dwarka, New Delhi.
3. On the date of the incident, i.e., 06.02.2026, a dispute arose between the Petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 regarding the entry of the Petitioner’s car into the society premises, as the vehicle did not bear the requisite society sticker on its windshield, owing to which it was stopped at the gate. The accused, who was on wheels, got annoyed because of the abovesaid act of the complainant and started abusing him and, eventually, threatened him and assaulted him.
4.  The matter has, however, been amicably settled between the parties and Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 06.02.2026 has also been placed on record which indicates that on basis of ‘unconditional apology’ tendered by the accused, the complainant-Mr. Narender Sharma as well as one another prosecution witness i.e. Mr. Bhule Singh Chautala (respondent No.3 herein) have pardoned the accused and, therefore, they have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.
5. The affidavits of the injured/respondent No.2-Mr. Narender Sharma as well of respondent No.3- Mr. Bhule Singh Chautala have been placed on record and they both have joined the proceedings through video-conferencing from the concerned police station and are present with I.O.-SI Sandeep Yadav.
6. I.O. identifies them and they both submit that the parties have voluntarily entered into settlement of their own free will without any coercion and influence.
7. When asked, respondent No.2 responded that he has been adequately reimbursed for his medical expenditure and has received the settlement amount and therefore, he would have no-objection if the FIR in question is quashed.
8. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when dispute does not involve any public interest and is, primarily, private in nature. In any case, even the complainant does not wish to press any charges against the petitioner. 
9. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
10. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.0004/2026 dated 06.01.2026, registered at P.S. Sector 23 Dwarka, for commission of offences under Sections 115(2)/126(2)/351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (BNS), 2023 (corresponding Sections 323/341/506 IPC), along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed.
11. Both the sides would ensure that the original copy of Memorandum of Understanding dated 06.02.2026 and the original affidavits of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are handed over to the Investigating Officer within one week from today and I.O. shall keep all such documents in case diary. 
12.  The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
13. Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. 



(MANOJ JAIN)                                                                                 JUDGE
FEBRUARY 23, 2026/ss/sa
	                                      

CRL.M.C. 1470/2026                                                    1