CRL.M.C. 5772/2026 1 $~88 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 24th August, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC010363632026 + CRL.M.C. 5772/2026 RAJ KUMAR & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Mahima Choudhary, Advocate with petitioners in person. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State with SI Mohit Malik, PS Vijay Vihar. Mr. Madan Kumar Jha, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) CRL.M.A. 24110/2026 (exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 5772/2026 1. Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No.393/2024 dated 13.09.2024, registered at Police Station Vijay Vihar, for commission of offences under Sections 420/34 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 made by respondent No.2 in which he alleged that petitioner had cheated him of Rs.11,00,000/-. According to him, the petitioner had misrepresented that he CRL.M.C. 5772/2026 2 would arrange a job for his nephew and on his such assurance, he had made the abovesaid payment. 3. Learned Addl. P.P. for the State submits that the matter is under investigation and charge-sheet is yet to be filed. 4. Quashing is being sought as the matter has already been amicably settled between the parties and MoU dated 03.08.2026 has been placed on record. 5. On the last date, when the matter was taken up, though, respondent No.2 had claimed that the matter has been amicably settled, it was noticed that the cheated amount was Rs.11,00,000/- whereas as per the terms of settlement, the complainant had received Rs.9,50,000/- only. Though he did not seem inclined to have full refund, during the course of the arguments on the last date of hearing, the petitioner had, however, agreed to make the payment of the balance amount also. 6. Respondent no. 2, who has been duly identified by his counsel and also by the Investigating Officer, submits that he has received further amount of Rs.1,50,000/- through UPI and now the entire sum of Rs.11,00,000/- has been received by him. He states that he has entered into the abovesaid settlement out of his own free will, without any coercion and influence from any corner whatsoever and therefore, he would have ‘no objection’ if FIR in question is quashed. He submits that he has already accepted the abovesaid amount and apology of the petitioners. 7. The offence in question is compoundable in nature. 8. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when dispute is, primarily, private in nature. In any case, even the complainant does not CRL.M.C. 5772/2026 3 wish to press any charges against the petitioners. 9. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR. 10. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.393/2024 dated 13.09.2024, registered at Police Station Vijay Vihar, for commission of offences under Sections 420/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is, hereby, quashed subject to petitioners depositing total cost of Rs. 25,000/-with Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within four weeks from today. Proof of deposit of cost alongwith MoU dated 03.08.2026, original affidavits, copies of which have been placed on record in the present proceedings, shall be handed over to SHO/IO within further two weeks. 11. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. (MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE AUGUST 24, 2026/st/sk