Criminal proceedings arising from private neighbourhood disputes may be quashed upon comprehensive settlement.

The petitions concerned six FIRs registered at South Rohini and Raj Park Police Stations, arising from a series of confrontations between persons living in the same neighbourhood.

The parties entered into a common settlement agreement dated 31 January 2026, providing for mutual non-interference and involving no monetary consideration.

The parties affirmed their consent to quashing the FIRs and consequential proceedings; the State submitted that it had no in-principle objection because the disputes were essentially private.

1. Whether the FIRs and consequential criminal proceedings should be quashed in view of the parties’ comprehensive settlement.

2. Whether the settlement and quashing should be subject to costs payable by the parties.

The Court applied the principles in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, requiring consideration of the nature and gravity of the alleged conduct, its impact beyond the parties, and whether terminating the proceedings would secure the ends of justice.

The judgment identifies no specific statutory provision as the basis for the decision.

The Court treated the FIRs as arising from private disputes between neighbours and noted that the settlement addressed the recurring source of conflict through mutual non-interference, without monetary consideration.

In light of the affected persons’ express consent and the State’s lack of in-principle objection, the Court concluded that continuing the proceedings would prolong the disputes without serving a meaningful purpose and that giving effect to the settlement would secure the ends of justice.

It also directed each party to pay Rs. 2,500 to the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within four weeks; the petitions and pending applications were disposed of accordingly.