$~48 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3911/2025 & CRL.M.A. 35287/2025 SANDEEP KAPOOR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Madhav Khurana, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Saud Khan, Mr. Vaibhav Suri, Mr. Tushan Rawal, Mr. Shivaz Berry, Mr. Pulkit Shree, Mr. Shiv Kapoor, Ms. Shaurya Singh and Mr. Aman Tiwari, Advs.

Petitioners in person.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC for State with Mr. Arjit Sharma and Ms. Sakshi Jha, Advs.

with ASI Basant, PS Kapashera Respondents no.2 to 6 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

O R D E R

% 27.11.2025

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”) [earlier Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter “CrPC”)] has been filed by the petitioners praying for quashing of FIR No.346/2021 dated 07.09.2021 registered at Police Station – Kapashera for the offences punishable under Sections

288/338/304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”).

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 06.09.2021, late Mr. Shiv Shankar Mehto, who was a daily wage worker, was engaged by an event organizer at Pushpanjali Farms, Bijwasan, Delhi. At around 2.00 pm, he suffered an electric burn accident. He was rushed to the hospital but succumbed to his injuries during treatment. Thereafter, a complaint was registered against the petitioners. Hence the present FIR.

3. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that chargesheet has not been filed against the petitioners. It is submitted that the petitioners and respondents no.2 to 6 have settled their disputes amicably and are now moving forward towards a peaceful and harmonious future.

4. Compromise deed dated 25.11.2025 is on record and has been annexed as Annexure P-4. Qua this deed, the respondents no.2 to 6 have agreed to withdraw the case arising out of FIR No.346/2021 registered at Police Station – Kapashera against the petitioners.

5. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners are willing to increase the compensation amount from ₹4,50,000/- to ₹9,00,000/-. He submits that the petitioners have already paid ₹4,50,000/- to the Respondents no.2 to 6 (family of the deceased) and are willing to pay ₹4,50,000/- today. Let the needful be done.

6. The Respondent no.5 is directed to make a fixed deposit of this compensation amount of ₹9,00,000/- in the name of Respondent no.2. The Investigating Officer is directed to ensure that the needful is done.

7. 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.

8. Learned ASC 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.

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

11. On a query made by this Court, respondents no.2 to 6 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.

12. Keeping in view the fact that the matter stands settled between the petitioners and respondents no.2 to 6 amicably without any pressure, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending.

13. In view of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them.

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

15. 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.