$~101 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 7713/2025 MOHD. RASHID & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Raj Kumar and Mr. H. Rehman, Advs. with petitioners in person. versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Richa Dhawan, APP for State with Insp. A.K. Singh and SI Sunit Kumar, PS Jagat Puri. Mr. Lareb Habib Ansari, Adv. for R- 2/complainant with complainant in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN O R D E R % 03.11.2025 CRL.M.A. 32233/2025 (exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. Application stands disposed of. CRL.M.C. 7713/2025 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 CrPC read with Section 528 BNSS, 2023 seeking quashing of FIR No.345/2011 under Sections 389/323/452/384/385/506/34 IPC registered at Police Station Jagat Puri, Delhi and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement. 2. Issue notice. Ms. Richa Dhawan, learned APP for the State accepts 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 10/11/2025 at 15:21:56 notice. She submits that the present case is only of simple injury. 3. The petitioners, as well as, respondents are present in the Court and they have been identified by their respective counsel, as well as, by the IO Insp. A.K. Singh and SI Sunit Kumar, PS Jagat Puri. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits that during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at settlement, terms whereof have been reduced in writing in the form of settlement deed dated 06.10.2025, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure P-3 to the present petition. 5. The petitioner who is present in Court on being queried affirms the factum of settlement and states that he has no objection in case the FIR is quashed. 6. At this stage, apt would it be to refer to the observations of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303: (SCC p. 340, para 58) “58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.” 7. In view of the settlement between the parties, the ultimate chances of conviction in the case are bleak, therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings will not serve any useful purpose and it will be an exercise in 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 10/11/2025 at 15:21:56 futility. 8. It is, thus, in the interest of justice that the present FIR and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed. 9. Consequently, the petition is allowed and the FIR No.345/2011 under Sections 389/323/452/384/385/506/34 IPC registered at Police Station Jagat Puri, Delhi alongwith all other proceedings emanating therefrom, is quashed. 10. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. VIKAS MAHAJAN, J NOVEMBER 3, 2025 N.S. ASWAL 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 10/11/2025 at 15:21:56