Delhi High Court - Orders
Dilshad Khan & Ors vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors on 17 September, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~83, 85
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 3006/2025, CRL.M.A. 27855/2025
DILSHAD KHAN & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Petitioners in person.
versus
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sarfaraz Ahmed and Mr. Raj
Kumar, Advocates for R-2, 3.
Mr. Sanjay Lao, SC for State with
Mr. Priyam Agarwal, Mr. Abhinav
Arya and Mr. Aryan Sachdeva,
Advocates.
+ W.P.(CRL) 3024/2025, CRL.M.A. 28000/2025
INAAM AHMED & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Sarfaraz Ahmed and Mr. Raj
Kumar, Advocates with Petitioners in
person.
versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, SC for State with
Mr. Priyam Agarwal, Mr. Abhinav
Arya and Mr. Aryan Sachdeva,
Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 17.09.2025
1. These petitions under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha W.P.(CRL) 3006/2025, W.P.(CRL) 3024/2025 Page 1 of 6 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 03/10/2025 at 22:01:46 Sanhita, 20231 (corresponding to Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 19732), seek quashing of cross FIRs, arising from the same occurrence. The FIRs in question are:
(i) W.P.(CRL) 3006/2025 - FIR No. 0331/2025 dated 9th July, 2025 under Sections 115(2)/79/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, 3 registered at P.S. Bhajan Pura, Delhi, on the complaint of Inam Ahmed; and,
(ii) W.P.(CRL) 3024/2025 - FIR No. 0330/2025 dated 9th July, 2025 under Sections 324(2)/333/351(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, registered at P.S. Bhajan Pura, Delhi, on the complaint of Dilshad Khan.
2. Both FIRs trace back to the events of 8 th July, 2025. The underlying dispute stems from matrimonial discord between Anjum Afzal and her husband Azim Khan, which culminated in a confrontation between their respective families.
3. In FIR No. 0331/2025, the complainant, Inam Ahmed (brother of Anjum), alleged that his sister had been subjected to cruelty and driven out of her matrimonial home. When the complainant and his family visited Azim's residence on 8th July, 2025, Azim and his relatives allegedly abused and threatened them, and pelted stones from the balcony, causing injuries to the complainant's family members, including his sister Shahnaz. She was subsequently taken to hospital on a PCR call. On these allegations, the case was registered under Sections 115(2), 79, and 3(5) BNS against twelve accused.
4. Conversely, in FIR No. 0330/2025, Dilshad Khan, father of Azim 1 "BNSS"
2 "CrPC"
W.P.(CRL) 3006/2025, W.P.(CRL) 3024/2025 Page 2 of 6This 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 03/10/2025 at 22:01:46 Khan, alleged that on the same day, the rival family gathered outside his house armed with sticks, iron rods, and stones, broke the gate and CCTV cameras, and attempted to force their way inside to assault them. The complainant's family locked themselves in a room and dialed 112, following which the alleged assailants fled. On these allegations, the case was registered under Sections 324(2), 333, 351(2), and 3(5) BNS.
5. The parties, with the intervention of family members and other well- wishers in society, have amicably resolved their disputes. In this regard, it is stated that Azim Khan and his wife, Anjum Afzal, have executed a Settlement Deed dated 21st July, 2025, recording the terms of compromise. The parties have agreed to bring an end to all hostilities and to jointly seek quashing of the proceedings emanating from both FIRs. A copy of the settlement deed has been placed on record and perused by the Court. The complainants in both cases are present in person and have categorically affirmed that they do not wish to pursue the criminal proceedings any further. They have further stated that their decision to settle is voluntary, without any coercion, pressure, or undue influence. Affidavits to that effect have also been placed on record.
6. The parties present before the Court are duly identified by the IO. Dilshad Khan, the Complainant in FIR No. 330/2025 and Inam Ahmed, the Complainant in FIR No. 331/2025, confirm the settlement deed dated 21 st July, 2025.
7. The Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.4 has clarified that even non-compoundable offences can be quashed on the basis 3 "BNS"
4 (2012) 10 SCC 303 W.P.(CRL) 3006/2025, W.P.(CRL) 3024/2025 Page 3 of 6 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 03/10/2025 at 22:01:46 of a settlement between the parties if the circumstances so warrant. The relevant portion of the judgment states:
"11. As discussed above, offence punishable under Section 186/332/353 of the IPC are non compoundable being of serious nature, however, if the Court feels that continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in this case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored, it can order for quashing of the FIR or criminal proceedings as it is the duty of the Court to prevent continuation of unnecessary judicial process.
12. In view of the law discussed above, considering the Settlement arrived at between the parties and the statements of respondent no.1 & 2, I am of the considered opinion that this matter deserves to be given a quietus as continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an an exercise in futility."
8. Further, in Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.,5 the Supreme Court held as follows:
"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."
[Emphasis Supplied]
9. Notably, the offences under Sections 115(2), 324(2), and 351(2) of 5 (2014) 6 SCC 466 W.P.(CRL) 3006/2025, W.P.(CRL) 3024/2025 Page 4 of 6 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 03/10/2025 at 22:01:46 the BNS are compoundable, while the offence under Section 79 BNS is compoundable only with the leave of the Court. The offence under Section 333 BNS, however, is non-compoundable. Nonetheless, having regard to the nature of the allegations and the fact that both FIRs arise out of a domestic discord that escalated into a confrontation between the two families, this Court is of the view that no element of overriding public interest is involved. The offences alleged, though falling under the BNS, are essentially borne out of private enmity and do not partake of the character of grave or heinous crimes impacting society at large. Once the parties have resolved their differences amicably, continuance of criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would amount to an abuse of process.
10. The Court must also take into account the practical realities of securing a conviction in the present case. The Supreme Court has consistently held that where the chances of conviction are remote due to an amicable settlement between the parties, the Court should consider whether continuing the prosecution would serve any meaningful purpose. Since the complainants have entered into a voluntary and genuine settlement, and are unwilling to pursue the case, the likelihood of conviction diminishes significantly. Thus, considering the totality of circumstances, the Court is of the view that allowing the prosecution of the impugned FIRs to continue would serve no useful purpose. It would be a waste of judicial time and would lead to an unnecessary burden on the State Exchequer. Applying the settled principles laid down in the above-noted decisions, it is a fit case for this Court to exercise inherent power under Section 528 BNSS to quash criminal proceedings.
11. However, since the State machinery was set in motion based on the W.P.(CRL) 3006/2025, W.P.(CRL) 3024/2025 Page 5 of 6 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 03/10/2025 at 22:01:46 impugned cross FIRs, it is appropriate to impose costs on the Petitioners. Accordingly, all the parties are directed to deposit INR 3,500/- each with the Delhi Police Welfare Fund within six weeks from today. The proof of deposit of costs shall be submitted to the IO.
12. In view of the foregoing, the present petitions are allowed and FIR No. 0331/2025 dated 9th July, 2025 and FIR No. 0330/2025 dated 9th July, 2025, both registered at P.S. Bhajan Pura are quashed. Accordingly, all proceedings emanating from the above two FIRs are also quashed.
13. It is expected that the parties shall abide by the terms of settlement.
14. Accordingly, the petitions are disposed of.
15. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of as infructuous.
SANJEEV NARULA, J SEPTEMBER 17, 2025 nk W.P.(CRL) 3006/2025, W.P.(CRL) 3024/2025 Page 6 of 6 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 03/10/2025 at 22:01:46