Delhi High Court
Pramod Kumar vs Thae State Gnct Of Delhi And Anr on 23 September, 2025
$~38
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 23.09.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ CRL.M.C. 2971/2024 & CRL.M.A. 11378/2024 EXEMPTION
FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES
PRAMOD KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anand Mishra, Adv. with
petitioner in person.
versus
THE STATE GNCT OF DELHI AND ANR.
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastav, APP with
SI Vivek Kumar, PS
Barakhamba Road.
R-2 in person.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
JUDGMENT(ORAL)
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
1. This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 188/2014, dated
10.12.2014, registered at P.S Barakhamba Road, Delhi under Sections
279/337 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of
settlement between the parties.
2. As per allegations made in the FIR, on 10.12.2014, a collusion
occurred between respondent no. 2's bike (DL6SAF7953) and
petitioner's car (DL3CBR5684), leading to injuries to respondent no.
2. Chargesheet has since been filed under sections 279/338 IPC
against the petitioner.
3. During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved
their disputes before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Patiala House Court,
New Delhi and executed a Mediation Settlement dated 23.09.2023. In
view of the aforesaid settlement petitioner has paid Rs. 1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lac only) as compensation to respondent no. 2/
complainant. Copy of Mediation Settlement dated 23.09.2023 has
been annexed as Annexure C. Offence under section 338 IPC has
since been compounded with the petitioner before the Trial Court.
4. Parties are physically present Court. They have been identified
by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI
Vivek Kumar, from PS Barakhamba Road.
5. Respondent no. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably
settled with the petitioner without any force, fear, coercion and he has
received the entire settlement amount and has no objection if the FIR
No. 188/2014 is quashed against the petitioner.
6. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned
Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the
present FIR No. 188/2014 is quashed.
7. In Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon'ble
Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of
disputes by observing as under:-
"61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would
be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the
criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings
would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and
compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to
secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put
to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the
affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to
quash the criminal proceedings."
8. Further, it is settled that the inherent powers under section 482
of the Code are required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice or
to prevent abuse of the process of any court. Further, the High Court
can quash non-compoundable offences after considering the nature of
the offence and the amicable settlement between the concerned
parties. Reliance may be placed upon B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana,
(2003) 4 SCC 675.
9. While it is true that the offence under Section 279 of IPC is not
an offence in personam, thereby that it affects society at large and not
just the individual complainant, the Court must also take into account
the practical realities of securing a conviction in the present case. The
Supreme Court has consistently held that where the chances of
conviction are remote due to an amicable settlement between the
parties, the Court should consider whether continuing the prosecution
would serve any meaningful purpose.
10. In view of the above facts that the parties have amicably
resolved their differences out of their own free will and without any
coercion. Hence, it would be in the interest of justice, to quash the
abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
11. The petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 188/2014, dated
10.12.2014, registered at P.S Barakhamba Road, Delhi under section
279/337 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating
therefrom is hereby quashed.
12. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
13. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
September 23, 2025
SK
