Delhi High Court - Orders
Vikas Ceaser And Ors vs State Nct Of Delhi And Ors on 11 September, 2025
$~8 & 9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 236/2025
VIKAS CEASER AND ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Anoj Kumar Singh,
Adv.
All the petitioners in
person.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for
the State with SI Preeti, PS
VK South and SI Arti, PS
VK North.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta,
Mr. A. Gupta and Mr.
Ishan Parashar, Advs. for
R-2.
R-2 & 3 in person.
+ CRL.M.C. 194/2025 & CRL.M.A. 1014/2025
KABIR AND ANR. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta,
Mr. A. Gupta and Mr.
Ishan Parashar, Advs.
Both the petitioners in
person.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for
the State with SI Preeti, PS
VK South and SI Arti, PS
VK North.
Mr. Anoj Kumar Singh,
Adv. for R-2.
R-2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
CRL.M.C. 236/2025 & CRL.M.C. 194/2025 Page 1 of 8
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/10/2025 at 21:42:46
ORDER
% 11.09.2025
1. The present petitions are filed seeking quashing of FIR No. 560/2022 dated 28.11.2022, registered at Police Station Vasant Kunj South, for offences under Sections 354/354(B)/323/509/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC') and FIR No. 553/2021 dated 25.10.2021, registered at Police Station Vasant Kunj South, for offences under Sections 323/354/509/34 of the IPC and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ('POCSO').
2. Chargesheet has been filed in FIR No. 553/2021 for offences under Sections 323/354/509/34 of the IPC and Sections 8/12 of the POCSO.
3. The learned counsel for the parties submit that the parties are related to each other and due to a property dispute, a scuffle took place between the parties where all the family members got involved, which led to registration of the cross-FIRs.
4. They submit that certain injuries were caused and no intention can be imputed on the parties for committing the sexual offences.
5. The present petition is filed on the ground that the parties have settled their disputes before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi on 30.05.2024, out of their own free will without any threat, pressure, coercion or undue influence.
6. It is stated that as per the settlement dated 30.05.2024, Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in CRL.M.C. 236/2025 have already received a sum of ₹22,00,000/- from the petitioners in CRL.M.C. 236/2025.
CRL.M.C. 236/2025 & CRL.M.C. 194/2025 Page 2 of 8This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/10/2025 at 21:42:46
7. The parties are present in Court today and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer.
8. The victim in CRL.M.C. 194/2025 states that there was an altercation between the family members. She submits that the complaint was given at that time on the advice received. She states that she has since attained the age of majority she does not wish to pursue the proceedings arising out of the respective FIR.
9. The victims in CRL.M.C. 236/2025 also state that the disputes have been settled and they do not wish to pursue the proceedings arising out of the respective FIR and have no objection if the same are quashed.
10. The parties state that the dispute in regard to the property which had led to the altercation, has also been settled and the parties have decided to move on in life having no grievance against each other.
11. Offences under Sections 323/509 of the IPC are compoundable whereas offences under Sections 354/354(B) of the IPC and Sections 8/12 of the POCSO are non-compoundable.
12. It is well settled that the High Court while exercising its powers under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ('BNSS') (erstwhile Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) can quash offences which are non- compoundable on the ground that there is a compromise between the accused and the complainant. The Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down parameters and guidelines for High Court while accepting settlement and quashing the proceedings. In the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr. : (2014) 6 SCC 466, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had observed as under :-
CRL.M.C. 236/2025 & CRL.M.C. 194/2025 Page 3 of 8This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/10/2025 at 21:42:46 "29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:
29.1. Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves.
However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.
29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:
(i) ends of justice, or
(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court.
While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives. 29.3. Such a power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for the offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. 29.4. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.
29.5. While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not CRL.M.C. 236/2025 & CRL.M.C. 194/2025 Page 4 of 8 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/10/2025 at 21:42:46 quashing the criminal cases."
(emphasis supplied)
13. Similarly, in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Anr. : (2017) 9 SCC 641, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had observed as under :-
"16. The broad principles which emerge from the precedents on the subject, may be summarised in the following propositions:
16.1. Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court.
16.2. The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a first information report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence.
While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non- compoundable.
16.3. In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or complaint should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power.
16.4. While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be exercised (i) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court.
16.5. The decision as to whether a complaint or first information report should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulated. 16.6. In the exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot appropriately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the CRL.M.C. 236/2025 & CRL.M.C. 194/2025 Page 5 of 8 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/10/2025 at 21:42:46 dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences.
16.7. As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned.
16.8. Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute.
16.9. In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice; and 16.10. There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions 16.8. and 16.9. above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the State have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance."
(emphasis supplied)
14. It is not in doubt that the offences under Sections 8/12 of the POCSO and under Sections 354/354B of the IPC are grave in nature. Offences of such nature cannot be quashed merely because the victims have settled the disputes. Such offences, in true sense, cannot be said to be offences in personam as the same are crimes against the society.
15. The present FIRs appear to have been registered pursuant to an altercation where all family members got involved and the complaints were given with certain amount of exaggeration. The CRL.M.C. 236/2025 & CRL.M.C. 194/2025 Page 6 of 8 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/10/2025 at 21:42:46 victims in the respective cases have stated that they do not wish to pursue the proceedings arising out of the respective FIRs. In the peculiar circumstances of this case, it is unlikely that the present FIRs will result in a conviction when the victims do not wish to pursue the respective cases. In such circumstances, continuation of the proceedings would only cause ill will to fester between the parties and cause undue harassment especially since the parties have now settled their disputes and decided to live their lives peacefully in the future.
16. Keeping in view the fact that the parties have amicably entered into a settlement, this Court feels that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the dispute alive and continuance of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court. I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise discretionary jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS.
17. However, keeping in mind the fact that the State machinery has been put to motion, ends of justice would be served if the petitioners are put to cost.
18. In view of the above, FIR No. 560/2022 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed, subject to payment of cost of ₹40,000/- by the petitioners in CRL.M.C. 236/2025, to be deposited with Delhi Police Martyrs' Fund, within a period of eight weeks from date.
19. In view of the above, FIR No. 553/2021 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed, subject to payment of cost of ₹40,000/- by the petitioners in CRL.M.C. 194/2025, to be deposited with Delhi Police Martyrs' Fund, within a period of eight weeks from date.
CRL.M.C. 236/2025 & CRL.M.C. 194/2025 Page 7 of 8This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/10/2025 at 21:42:46
20. Proof of deposit of cost shall be furnished to the concerned SHO.
21. The present petitions are allowed in the aforesaid terms. Pending application(s) also stand disposed of.
22. A copy of this order be placed in both the matters.
AMIT MAHAJAN, J SEPTEMBER 11, 2025 'KDK' CRL.M.C. 236/2025 & CRL.M.C. 194/2025 Page 8 of 8 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/10/2025 at 21:42:46