SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 46951

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DHEERAJ SAPRA VS. PRADEEP JAIN
CRL.M.C. 9193/2025



##PAGE1##

$~100

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 9193/2025

DHEERAJ KUMAR@DHEERAJ SHARMA .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Rahul Gaur, Adv.

versus

STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. & ORS.

.....Respondents

Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP for State

with SI Harish, PS. Keshav Puram.

Mr. Bipan Sharma, Authorised

representative of R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 22.12.2025

CRL.M.A. 38391/2025 (exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 9193/2025

3. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023

seeking quashing of FIR No.657/2024 under Section 316(4) BNS, 2023

registered at Police Station Keshav Puram and all consequential proceedings

emanating therefrom on the ground that the parties have arrived at a

settlement.

4. Issue notice. Mr. Tarang Srivastava, learned APP for the State accepts

notice.

5. The petitioner is present in Court whereas Mr. Bipan Sharma,

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 20/01/2026 at 01:39:26

##PAGE2##

authorised representative of respondent no.2, has joined through VC and

they have been identified by their respective counsels, as well as, by the

Investigating Officer SI Harish, PS. Keshavpuram.

6. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was working with

respondent no.2 company and the petitioner diverted the amount from the

clients of the company and received the same directly into his account. The

dispute between the parties led to the registration of the present FIR.

7. On being queried by Court, Mr. Srivastava, learned APP, on

instructions from the I.O, states that no charge sheet has been filed till date

in the present matter.

8. During pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at a

settlement, terms whereof were reduced in writing in the form of Settlement

Deed dated 09.04.2025 which is annexed as Annexure P-2 to the present

petition.

9. It is a term of the settlement between the parties that the petitioner

shall pay a total sum of Rs. 1.50 lacs to respondent no.2 towards full and

final settlement of all its claims. The entire settlement amount has already

been paid by the petitioner to respondent no.2 in the manner as mentioned in

the settlement.

10. The receipt of entire amount of Rs. 1.50 lacs is acknowledged by Mr.

Bipan Sharma, authorised representative of respondent no.2, who has joined

through VC.

11. Mr. Sharma, the authorised representative of respondent no.2, on a

query posed by the Court, states that he has no objection in case the FIR is

quashed.

12. At this stage, apt would it be to refer to the observations of the

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 20/01/2026 at 01:39:26

##PAGE3##

Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303:

(SCC p. 340, para 58)

“58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having

regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the

victim has been settled although the offences are not

compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of

criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in

the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an

end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the

ultimate guiding factor.”

13. In view of the settlement between the parties, the ultimate chances of

conviction in the case are bleak, therefore, continuation of criminal

proceedings will not serve any useful purpose and it will be an exercise in

futility.

14. It is, thus, in the interest of justice that the present FIR and all the

other proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed.

15. Consequently, the petition is allowed and the FIR No.657/2024 under

Section 316(4) BNS, 2023 registered at Police

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top