$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 8609/2025 ASHOK KUMAR SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Jai Kumar Sharma and Mr.

Rishabh Malhotra, Advocates with petitioner in person.

versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP with Ms.

Pragati Gupta, Advocate.

Mr. Shubham Agarwal, Advocate for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

O R D E R

% 24.02.2026

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 93/2021 dated 24.02.2021 registered at Police Station Mandwali Fazal Pur, Delhi, under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, [“IPC”], alongwith all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.

2. Issue notice. Mr. Hitesh Vali, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, accepts notice on behalf of the State. Mr. Shubham Agarwal, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 2.

3. The petitioner and respondent No. 2 are present in Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel as well as by the Investigating Officer.

4. The subject FIR records that the prosecutrix was employed as a domestic staff in the petitioner’s residence. The prosecutrix was residing in quarters provided by the petitioner, at his residential premises, bearing Flat No. 13/301, Commonwealth Games Village. It is alleged that, on the intervening night of 16.03.2020 at about 12:00 a.m., the petitioner/accused, who was in the habit of returning late at night, entered her room in an intoxicated condition, forcibly overpowered her, and committed rape. The FIR further alleges that when the prosecutrix disclosed the incident to the co-accused, namely the wife of the petitioner, she was dissuaded from reporting the matter and was thereafter threatened by both accused persons. It is further alleged that she was compelled to write on a blank paper admitting to theft and was intimidated with threats of false implication and harm to herself and her relatives in the event she approached the police authorities.

5. It appears from the record that, prior to registration of the aforesaid FIR on 24.02.2021 [pertaining to the alleged incident of 16.03.2020], another FIR bearing No. 267/2020 dated 24.06.2020, had been registered at Police Station Mandawali Fazal Pur under Section 381 IPC at the instance of the petitioner’s wife against respondent No. 2. In the said FIR, it was alleged that respondent No. 2, while employed as a domestic worker and residing in the servant quarters at the aforesaid premises, had committed theft of approximately Rs.50,000/- alongwith certain other belongings, during the course of her employment. This incident was also stated to have taken place on 16.03.2020.

6. Mr. Vali submits that, insofar as FIR No. 93/2021 is concerned, a closure report has already been filed twice by the investigating agency; however, the matter is presently pending before the learned Trial Court at the stage of consideration of the protest petition.

7. The parties state that they have amicably resolved their disputes in relation to FIR No. 93/2021. The present petition seeking quashing of the said FIR is founded upon a Settlement Deed dated 19.07.2025 executed between the petitioner and respondent No. 2, whereby they have agreed to bring the criminal proceedings to a quietus. Respondent No. 2 is present in Court, has been duly identified, and unequivocally affirms the factum as well as the voluntariness of the settlement, and states that she has no objection to the quashing of the subject FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

8. It is a settled proposition of law that the inherent powers of this Court are of wide amplitude and may be invoked to quash criminal proceedings even in respect of offences which are non-compoundable, where the parties have entered into a genuine and voluntary settlement. At the same time, the Supreme Court has consistently emphasised that such extraordinary jurisdiction must be exercised sparingly, with due caution and circums