Quashing of FIRs Alleging Sexual Misbehavior and Assault Permitted Upon Settlement Between Related Parties to Secure Justice

These connected petitions involve cross-FIRs between relatives residing in the same locality.

In FIR No. 0299/2019 (PS Kotwali), Dr. Deepanjali Gupta and Dr. Amit Agarwal were accused of assaulting and restraining Ms. Namrata Aggarwal near a school gate

In FIR No. 0280/2016 (PS Subzi Mandi), Shailender Aggarwal (Namrata’s husband) was accused of criminal trespass and outraging the modesty of Dr. Deepanjali Gupta

Charge-sheets were filed in both cases

Subsequently, the parties resolved nine pending disputes through the Delhi Mediation Centre and executed a written settlement deed on January 30, 2026, seeking to quash the criminal proceedings based on this compromise

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable offences when the parties have reached a voluntary settlement

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (formerly Section 482 CrPC), which preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice

The court also relied on the principle that where the chance of conviction is remote and the parties have settled personal or matrimonial disputes, quashing is appropriate to promote industrial or social peace

The Court observed that the parties are relatives living in the same neighborhood and had voluntarily ended their long-standing litigation through mediation

The Court noted that the complainants in both FIRs appeared (either in person or via video-conferencing) and expressed their lack of interest in pursuing the charges

The Court reasoned that since a settlement had been reached, continuing the criminal proceedings would serve no "useful purpose" and would result in an exercise in futility, as the complainants would not support the prosecution's case

To ensure the settlement was bona fide while maintaining judicial discipline, the Court conditioned the quashing on the payment of costs to legal services

It allowed both petitions and quashed FIR No. 0299/2019 and FIR No. 0280/2016 along with all consequential proceedings... subject to the petitioners in each case depositing costs of Rs. 20,000/- with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within four weeks