$~48 * IN THEHIGH COURTOF DELHIAT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 9th February, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 1066/2026 ANIKET CHOUDHARY & ORS. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Yatharth Sinha, Mr. Arjun Singh, Mr. Govind Pareek, Advocates.

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP with SI Suresh Kr. Meena, Advocate.

Mr. Vikas Kumar, Advocate For R-2 with R-2 in person.

CORAM:

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

1. Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No. 527/2023 dated 08.07.2023, registered at Police Station New Usmanpur, for commission of offences under Sections 323/325/341/506/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

2. As per the broad allegations appearing in the FIR, when complainant Keshav, along with friend Deepanshu were returning to home on a motorcycle, the accused persons stopped them and surrounded them. They both were beaten up with cricket bats and stumps and were also threatened of dire consequences, in case the matter was reported to the police.

3. Aforesaid incident was, however, reported to the police, which resulted in registration of aforesaid FIR.

4. Investigating officer is present in Court and states that charge-sheet has yet not been filed and one of the accused i.e. petitioner no. 1 is on anticipatory bail.

5. According to learned Addl. P.P. for State, as per instructions received by him from investigating officer, injuries were received by Keshav and Deepanshu and the injuries of Deepanshu were found to be grievous in nature as he had suffered fracture.

6. Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 17.01.2026 has been placed on record whereby matter has been amicably settled. MoU is, however, found to be signed by injured Keshav Bainsla only. The other injured Deepanshu is, though, not signatory to MoU, he, too, has no objection if FIR in question is quashed.

7. Keshav is present physically and injured Deepanshu has joined the proceedings through videoconferencing.

8. Both the injured have been identified by the investigating officer.

9. At the very outset, learned counsel for petitioners expresses his regret for not making the other injured as one of the respondents in present case. He submits that it was out of sheer inadvertence and also for the reason that the charge-sheet has yet not been filed and, therefore, he was not aware whether he, too, had received any injuries.

10. On the basis of the query made by the Court, injured Deepanshu submitted that he suffered fracture in the incident in question but since he is now focusing on his studies and preparing for some examination, he does not want any action against any of the petitioners. He also submits that he has pardoned all of them. He also supplements that though, he had incurred some medical expenses but since his father is a Government Employee, such expenditure has already been reimbursed and, therefore, he does not seek any further compensation with respect to the injuries received by him.

11. Keshav, the other injured, has also no objection if FIR is quashed.

12. 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 and is, primarily, private and matrimonial in nature.

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

14. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 527/2023 dated 08.07.2023, registered at Police Station New Usmanpur, for commission of offences under Sections 323/325/341/506/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed subject to each petitioner depositing cost of Rs. 10,000/- each with Delhi High Court Staff Welfare Fund [Account no. 15530110074442: IFSC UCBA0001553]

within two weeks from today.

15. The petition stands disposed of in afo