CRL.M.C. 3008/2025 $~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010256492025 + CRL.M.C. 3008/2025 AMAR KUMAR & ANR. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mohit Mudgal, Mr. Sandeep Yadav, Advocates alongwith Petitioners in Person. [M:- 9911557686] versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP SI P. Buno, PS Kalyan Puri. Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN O R D E R % 09.09.2026 1. The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashing of FIR No. 36/2023, dated 17.01.2023, registered under Sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, [“IPC”] at Police Station Kalyanpuri, Delhi, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, on the ground of settlement. 2. The impugned FIR refers to four accused, whereas the purported settlement has been entered into only with two persons. Further, the impugned FIR has been registered only under Section 420 of IPC, which is compoundable, with the leave of the Court. However, the chargesheet 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 14/09/2026 at 16:08:26 CRL.M.C. 3008/2025 has not been filed, which has led to the petitioners approaching this Court. 3. Mr. Mohit Mudgal, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that, although no status report has yet come on record pursuant to an order dated 06.08.2025, a status report was served upon him, which indicates that upon investigation, only petitioner No. 1 [accused No. 1] was found to be involved in the transaction. 4. Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, states, upon instructions from the Investigating Officer, that the chargesheet will be filed within one month. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, Mr. Mudgal does not press this petition, at this stage, but reserves the petitioners’ right to seek compounding of the offence before the Trial Court after filing of the chargesheet, or to approach this Court afresh at that stage, if necessary. 6. However, Mr. Mudgal states that there is also a separate proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which has been instituted by respondent No. 2 against petitioner No. 1. It is made clear that the parties may take necessary steps in accordance with law in those proceedings, and the present petition is confined to the FIR under Section 420 of the IPC. 7. The petition stands disposed of in these terms. PRATEEK JALAN, J SEPTEMBER 9, 2026 ‘pv’/ 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 14/09/2026 at 16:08:26