Delhi HC Refuses To Quash FIR Over Alleged Gunpoint Robbery Attempt, Despite Complainant’s Settlement

In brief

The question

Whether the FIR and criminal proceedings for the alleged armed robbery attempt and Arms Act offences could be quashed under Section 528 BNSS on the basis of a settlement between the petitioners and respondent no. 2.

The court held

The Court held that the case was not fit for quashing under Section 528 BNSS notwithstanding the compromise, because the allegations concerned a serious armed robbery attempt and included Arms Act offences.

It also directed

The petition and pending application were dismissed.

01Facts

The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 419/2019, registered at P.S. Sarita Vihar, under Sections 393/398/34 IPC and Sections 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, on the basis of a compromise with respondent no. 2.

¶ 1–3

The complainant alleged that the petitioners threatened him with a country-made pistol and attempted to rob him; the attempt ended when he escaped and a CISF jawan arrived.

¶ 6.1–6.9

Charges had been framed against both petitioners under Sections 393/398/34 IPC and against petitioner no. 1 under the Arms Act.

¶ 3

The parties executed a deed of compromise dated 24 February 2026.

¶ 7

02Issues

i.Whether the FIR and criminal proceedings for the alleged armed robbery attempt and Arms Act offences could be quashed under Section 528 BNSS on the basis of a settlement between the petitioners and respondent no. 2.

¶ 1, 7, 10–14

ii.Whether the alleged offences were sufficiently serious and public in character to preclude quashing despite the settlement.

¶ 9–13

03Law Applied

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, corresponding to Section 482 CrPC, confers inherent power to quash criminal proceedings, including in appropriate cases involving non-compoundable offences, but that power must be exercised sparingly to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of process.

¶ 11

Under Narinder Singh, compromise may support quashing in cases with an overwhelmingly civil character, but ordinarily not in prosecutions for heinous or serious offences that affect society.

¶ 11

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, further treats offences under the Arms Act as serious offences against society that cannot be quashed merely because the victim and accused have settled.

¶ 12

Provisions in the judgment · 12 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 482 Section 320

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 393 Section 398 Section 34 Section 392 Section 511 Section 307

Arms Act, 1959 Section 25 Section 54 Section 59

04Reasoning

The Court found that the allegations described an attempt to rob respondent no. 2 at gunpoint, which failed only after the complainant resisted and a CISF jawan arrived.

¶ 6.6–6.8, 10

The presence of charges under the Arms Act reinforced the serious and societal character of the alleged conduct. Applying Narinder Singh and Laxmi Narayan, the Court held that the parties’ settlement did not justify quashing these proceedings.

¶ 11–13