Facts
The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 187/2025, registered at Police Station Mukherjee Nagar under Sections 420, 406 and 34 IPC, on the basis of a settlement with respondent no. 2 dated 15 June 2026
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5–6The complainant appeared in person, confirmed that he understood and voluntarily accepted the settlement, and acknowledged that it provided for no repayment and that he had relinquished his monetary claim concerning the transactions
Source reference: p. 4, para. 7He stated that the petitioners lacked the financial means to pay any amount or compensation
Source reference: p. 4, para. 9The Court first allowed an application under Section 528 BNSS to restore the petition, then considered the quashing petition on the same day
Source reference: p. 1, paras. 1–4Issues
1. Whether the FIR and consequential proceedings should be quashed in light of the parties’ amicable settlement concerning private financial dealings
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5; p. 4, paras. 8–102. Whether the absence of repayment or compensation under the settlement prevented the Court from quashing the proceedings
Source reference: p. 4, paras. 7–10Law Applied
Section 528 BNSS was invoked for restoration of the petition, which the Court allowed
Source reference: p. 1, paras. 1–3For quashing, the Court relied on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, as authorities supporting the quashing of criminal proceedings in appropriate cases involving settlement of disputes between private parties
Source reference: p. 4, para. 10The Court considered the private nature of the dispute and the complainant’s voluntary decision to relinquish his monetary claim relevant to its determination
Source reference: p. 4, paras. 7–9Reasoning
The Court treated the dispute as concerning financial dealings between private persons, with no public funds involved
Source reference: p. 4, para. 8The complainant confirmed that his decision to settle was voluntary and that he knowingly relinquished his monetary claim, despite there being no provision for repayment or compensation
Source reference: p. 4, paras. 7, 9In light of those circumstances and the cited precedents, the Court found no impediment to quashing the proceedings
Source reference: p. 4, para. 10Holding
The Court allowed the restoration application and restored CRL.M.C. 6040/2026 to its original number
It then quashed FIR No. 187/2025 under Sections 420, 406 and 34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings, and disposed of the petition
Source reference: p. 5, paras. 11–12Acts & Sections Cited
4 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231
Indian Penal Code, 18603
Original Court PDF
Sh Parveen Garg & Anr.vsThe State Govt Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
