$~69 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2934/2024 JAVED & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Shivender Kumar Sharma, Advocate with Petitioners. versus THE STATE (GNCTD) & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel with SI Brijmohan Negi, PS Kotwali for the State. Counsel for R2 & R3 (appearance not given) with R2 & R3. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA O R D E R % 17.12.2025 CRL.M.A. 37710/2025 (for recall of the Order dated 17.11.2025) 1. Application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘B.N.S.S.’), has been filed on behalf of the Petitioners, for setting-aside the Order dated 17.11.2025 whereby the accompanying Petition has been dismissed in default on account of non-appearance of the Petitioners and the private Respondents. 2. It is submitted that since an adjournment slip had been filed on behalf of the private Respondents, the Petitioners chose not to appear and the learned counsel also was unable to appear. It is submitted that the non-appearance was not intentional and therefore, the Impugned Order dated 17.11.2025, be set-aside. 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 19/12/2025 at 14:05:56 3. Though, there is no cogent reason but in the interest of justice, the Application is allowed and the Impugned Order dated 17.11.2025 is set-aside and the accompanying Petition is restored to its original number. W.P.(CRL) 2934/2024 4. On the joint request of the parties, the main Petition is taken up today. 5. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘B.N.S.S.’), has been filed on behalf of the Petitioners, for quashing of FIR No. 349/2024 under Section 323/324/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Kotwali and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom, in terms of the Settlement dated 07.08.2024. 6. The incident happened when the Petitioners, who were passing from the shop of the Respondents, skid and thought that the Respondents were responsible fight ensued wherein the Petitioners inflicted injuries on both the Respondents by a danda and the scissors. 7. Learned Standing Counsel (Crl.) on behalf of the State, has opposed the quashing on the ground that there were weapons i.e. scissors, which were used and they were recovered from the spot. Section 307 IPC, has already been added and the Charge-Sheet filed. Considering the gravity of the offence, the Settlement dated 07.08.2024 be not permitted. 8. It is further submitted that the Petitioner No. 1, namely, Javed was involved in an FIR under Section 364A/302 IPC, though, he got acquitted. Considering the propensity of crime and the antecedents, quashing must not be permitted. Submissions heard and the record perused. 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 19/12/2025 at 14:05:56 9. Considering that the gravity of the offence where weapon has been used to inflict injuries on the Respondents and the Charge-Sheet already stands filed, it is not a fit Case for permitting the quashing of the said FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom. 10. The Petition is hereby dismissed and disposed of accordingly. NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J DECEMBER 17, 2025/RS 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 19/12/2025 at 14:05:56