$~87 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 4175/2025 LAL BAHADUR SHAH AND ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Vineet Mehta, Advs. along with petitioners versus THE STATE (GNCT) DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel for State SI Neeraj in person Mr. Prakhar Sharma, Adv. for R-2 and R-3 along with R-2 and R-3 CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

O R D E R

% 17.12.2025

1. The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter “BNSS”) has been filed by the petitioners praying for quashing of FIR No. 806/2025, registered at Police Station Kotwali, for the offences punishable under Sections 110/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter “BNS”).

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 08.10.2025, respondent no. 2 alleged that the petitioners, who run a neighbouring shop, assaulted him and respondent no. 3 following a dispute over obstruction caused by the accused by placing their counter in front of respondent no. 2’s shop. During the altercation, petitioner no. 2 allegedly struck respondent no. 2 on the head with an iron rod. Causing injuries. Accordingly, respondent no. 2 got the present FIR registered.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that amicably and are now moving forward towards a peaceful and harmonious future.

4. Settlement deed dated 06.11.2025 is on record and has been annexed as Annexure P-2. Qua this deed, the respondents no. 2 and 3 have agreed to withdraw the case arising out of FIR No. 806/2025, registered at Police Station Kotwali against the petitioners.

5. It is prayed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties that the instant FIR may be quashed on the basis of the compromise.

6. Learned APP for the State, who appears on advance notice, accepts notice and submits that there is no opposition to the prayer made by the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

8. The petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel and Investigating Officer, Police Station Kotwali. Respondents no. 2 and 3 are also present in the Court and have been identified by their counsel and the Investigating Officer.

9. On a query made by this Court, respondents no. 2 and 3 have categorically stated that they have entered into compromise on their own free will and without any pressure. It is also stated by them that the entire dispute has been amicably settled between the parties.

10. Keeping in view the fact that the matter stands amicably settled fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending.

11. In view of the fact that the parties are neighbouring shop owners and they have arrived at a settlement, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them.

12. It is, thus, in the interest of justice to quash the afore-mentioned FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

13. Hence, in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, FIR No. 806/2025, registered at Police Station Kotwali, for the offences punishable under Sections 110/3(5) of the BNS, and consequent proceedings emanating therefrom, are quashed qua the present petitioners.

14. The petition along with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

AJAY DIGPAUL, J DECEMBER 17, 2025/ar/dd