$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1058/2024, CRL.M.A. 9988/2024, CRL.M.A.

29065/2025 TUSHAR VATS & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Hitesh Baisla with Mr. Anukool Chawla and Mr. Lakshay Kaushik, Advocates.

P-1 and 2 in court.

P-3 and 4 via video-conferencing.

versus THE STATE (GNCTD) & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anand V Khatri, ASC for the State with SI Sonam, P.S.: Saket.

R-2 in court.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

O R D E R

% 10.02.2026 By way of the present petition filed under Article 226 read section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the petitioners and complainant/respondent No. 2, seek quashing of case FIR No. 37/2024 dated 09.01.2024 registered under sections 354/354(A)/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) at P.S.:

Saket, South District, Delhi.

2. The petition is premised on Settlement Deed/Memorandum of Understanding dated 12.11.2025, whereby the petitioners and respondent No. 2 have resolved the matter amicably.

3. The petition is also supported by affidavits of the petitioners and of respondent No. 2, alongwith proof of their IDs.

4. Petitioners Nos.1, 2 and respondent No.2 are present in court;

however petitioners Nos. 3 and 4 have joined via video-conferencing.

Their credentials have been verified and they have also been identified by their respective counsel.

5. The court has interacted with respondent No.2, as also with petitioners, who are close family members have confirmed that they have now resolved the matter and a Settlement Deed/Memorandum of Understanding dated 12.11.2025 has been signed by them closing all issues amicably. Parties now wish to live in peace and harmony going forward.

6. Mr. Anand V Khatri, learned ASC appearing for the State submits, that the Investigating Officer had filed a closure report in the matter; and no protest petition was filed on behalf of the complainant, nevertheless summons were issued by the learned Trial Court to the petitioners.

7. Learned ASC however confirms that the State has no objection to the subject FIR being quashed.

8. In the circumstances, in line with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2012) 10 SCC 303 as also in Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466, this court sees no reason why the subject FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom should not be quashed. This court is of the view that in light of the settlement between the contesting parties, continuing with the subject FIR and all subsequent proceedings would be an exercise in futility and would not be conducive to peace and harmony between the parties.

9. Accordingly, case FIR No. 37/2024 dated 09.01.2024 registered under sections 354/354(A)/506/34 IPC at P.S.: Saket, South District, Delhi is quashed. All proceedings arising therefrom also stand closed.

10. This order shall however be subject to each of the petitioners paying costs of Rs.7,500/- each to the 'Very Special Arts India', Plot No. 3 Institutional Area, Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi, within 02 weeks. Proof of payment of costs be placed on record within 01 week thereafter.

11. The Registry is directed to verify compliance; and to bring to the notice of this court any default in respect thereof.

12. Petition stands disposed-of.

13. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of.

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J FEBRUARY 10, 2026 ds