W.P.(CRL) 661/2024 $~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 661/2024 ARUN KUMAR LUMBA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Neha Sehrawat, Advocate alongwith petitioner (in-person) versus THE STATE GOVT. NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Y.R. Ansari, APP for State. Mr. Naveen Malhotra and Ms. Anjali, Advocates for R-2. SI Rita, P.S.: Rajinder Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 20.01.2026 By way of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, the petitioner and complainant/respondent No. 2, jointly seek quashing of summoning order dated 20.02.2020 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-03, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (‘MM’) in Ct. Cases No.523790/2016; and all consequential proceedings pending trial in the court of the learned MM. 2. The petition is premised on a mediated Settlement Agreement dated 11.12.2025 arrived at before the Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre, Delhi High Court, New Delhi, whereby the 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 31/01/2026 at 15:05:03 W.P.(CRL) 661/2024 petitioner and respondent No. 2 have resolved the matter amicably. The petition is also supported by affidavits of the petitioner and of respondent No. 2, alongwith proof of their IDs. 3. The contesting parties are present in court. Their credentials have been verified and they have also been identified by their respective counsel. 4. The court has interacted with respondent No.2, as also with petitioner. They submit that by way of mediated Settlement Agreement dated 11.12.2025, they have resolved all their inter-se disputes including in relation to the share of their sisters, all of whom have signed the mediated settlement agreement. They submit however, that since the complaint was filed by respondent No. 2 only against the petitioner, who is his brother, the present quashing petition has been filed only by the petitioner. 5. Mr. Y.R. Ansari, learned APP confirms, that the State has no role in the matter, since the matter emanates from a private complaint. 6. In the circumstances, in line with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2012) 10 SCC 303 as also in Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466, this court sees no reason why the subject complaint and all proceedings emanating therefrom should not be quashed. This court is of the view that in light of the settlement between the contesting parties, continuing with the subject complaint and all subsequent proceedings would be an exercise in futility and would not be conducive to peace and harmony between the parties. 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 31/01/2026 at 15:05:03 W.P.(CRL) 661/2024 7. Accordingly, complaint bearing Ct. Cases No. 523790/2016 is quashed. All proceedings arising therefrom also stand closed. 8. Petition stands disposed-of. 9. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J JANUARY 20, 2026 ss 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 31/01/2026 at 15:05:03