$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 13^th January, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 260/2026 &CRL.M.A. 951/2026 AKASH BINDAL & ANR. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitesh Gupta, Advocate.

versus STATE THROUGH SHO AND ORS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP with ASI Pharindra Karmali.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

1. Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No. 924/2025 dated 20.11.2025, registered at P.S. Narela Industrial Area under Sections 289/ 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Sections 287/304A of IPC) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

2. One Mr. Sailesh Kurre was working with M/s Global Label Resources LLP having its factory located at Sector 5, Bawana.

3. There was a lift in the abovesaid premises and on 20.11.2025, on account of malfunctioning of the lift, Mr. Sailesh Kurre received injuries. He was brought to the hospital where he was declared, brought dead.

4. Two accused persons i.e. petitioner No.1- Akash Bindal and Petitioner No.2-Vinod Kumar have been booked for commission of said offences.

5. The investigation is, reportedly, underway and charge-sheet is likely to be filed. As per I.O., such chargesheet would be only against Petitioner No.1-Mr. Akash Bindal.

6. Fact remains, in the interregnum, both the petitioners contacted the legal representatives of deceased employee and have entered into Memorandum of Settlement (MoS) which is duly signed by both the sides.

7. Reference has been made to MoU dated 20.12.2025 which carries signatures/thumb impressions of widow and mother of the deceased.

8. As per the terms of settlement, a demand draft in a sum of Rs. 9,00,000/- drawn on Union Bank of India has been handed over to the widow of the deceased, today itself.

9. Admittedly, after the unfortunate death of Mr. Sailesh Kurre, the petitioners had incurred expenditure towards ambulance, cremation, last rites etc. to the tune of Rs. 60,000/-.

10. Both the legal representatives i.e. widow and mother of the deceased have joined the proceedings through video-conferencing.

11. Mr. Aayush Bhatia (Enrollment No.CG/557-B/TR/18) also appears on behalf of both the abovesaid LRs of the deceased and identifies them also.

12. Learned counsel for petitioners, in all fairness, submits that the present settlement amount would be with respect to the quashing of criminal proceedings only and would not absolve them from their other statutory liability, if any.

13. The Investigating Officer (I.O.) is present and identifies widow of the deceased.

14. The demand draft has been handed over today at their native village by Mr. Animesh Goyal, Advocate.

15. The terms of the settlement have been reiterated by the widow of the deceased and she has received the abovesaid demand draft of Rs. 9,00,000/-

and has no objection if FIR in question is quashed.

16. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when dispute does not involve any public interest. In any case, even the complainant does not wish to press any charges against the petitioners.

17. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.

18. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 924/2025 dated 20.11.2025, registered at P.S. Narela Industrial Area under Sections 289/106 (1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed.

19. It is, however, made clear that the abovesaid settlement is only for the purpose for quashing of FIR in question and would not have any impact whatsoever with respect to any other statutory liability of the petitioners.

20. The petition, along with the pending application, stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

(MANOJ JAIN)

JUDGE JANUARY 13, 2026/sw/js