[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Santosh Rawat vs State( Govt. Of Nct Of Deli) Through Sho ... on 15 April, 2026
$~72
* IN THEHIGH COURTOF DELHIAT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 15thApril, 2026
+ CRL.M.C. 2799/2026 & CRL.M.A. 11324/2026
SANTOSH RAWAT .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Gaurav Arya with Mr. Naveen
Bamel and Mr. Harsh Goyal,
Advocate with petitioner in person.
versus
STATE( GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) THROUGH SHO
PS-SAGARPUR & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautma, APP for the
State with W/SI Manju, PS SagarPur.
Respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. Petitioner herein seeks quashing of FIR No.148/2026 dated
08.03.2026, registered at Police Station Sagar Pur, for commission of
offences under Sections 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 along
with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of
compromise arrived at between the parties.
2. The abovesaid FIR was registered on the basis of the complaint made
by respondent No.2 herein and keeping in mind the nature of allegations and
sensitivity of the matter, her identity has been concealed.
3. In her complaint made to the police, respondent No. 2 claimed that she
was in a committed relationship with accused for last six years, whom she met
on a dating app. During meeting, the accused assured her that he was in love
with her and wanted to marry her and, on such pretext, they entered into
physical relationship. However, later on, the petitioner started putting-off
marriage on one pretext or the other and, at one point of time, he even claimed
that he was suffering from a chronic disease i.e. Immune
Thrombocytopenia(ITP), an autoimmune disorder. Later, she learnt that the
applicant and his family were looking for some another girl and, feeling
cheated, she reported the matter to the police which resulted in the registration
of the abovesaid FIR.
4. The applicant is already, reportedly, on regular bail, which fact has
been confirmed by learned Addl. P.P. for the State, who is assisted by the
Investigating Officer.
5. Petitioner is present in person.
6. Respondent no. 2 is also present in person with her father and she has
been duly identified by Investigating Officer.
7. When asked, respondent No.2 submits that the matter has been
amicably settled and the settlement terms have been reduced in writing on
04.04.2026. She reiterates that they were in healthy consensual relationship
for last about six years and such relationship was voluntary in nature and out
of their own free will and according to her, on account of certain disputes and
differences, FIR was got registered but now she has entered into settlement in
good faith and without any pressure, coercion or inducement. She states that
the dispute was personal in nature and she does not want to pursue her
abovesaid FIR and submits that she would have 'no objection' if the FIR is,
accordingly, quashed.
8. During course of the proceedings, when asked, both the sides also
stated that they have broken up the abovesaid relationship and would meet as
friends only, and nothing more than that.
9. Respondent No.2 is present with her father and her father also states
that the matter has been amicably settled and in view of such settlement, his
daughter is no longer interested in pursuing with the present FIR. He also
states that she has decided to move on with her life and, therefore, it will be in
her interest also, if the present FIR is quashed.
10. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with
criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when even
the complainant does not wish to press any charges against the petitioner.
11. The power of the Court under Section 528 BNSS (corresponding
Section 482 Cr.P.C.) extends to quashing offences which are
non-compoundable on grounds of settlement between victim/complainant
and accused, however, such power is to be exercised with caution. Reference
in this regard is made to Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr.,
(2014) 6 SCC 466, wherein the Apex Court had observed that proceedings,
even in non-compoundable cases, can be quashed on the basis of settlement
provided that the Court is satisfied that there was no meaningful purpose in
continuing with the proceedings, and that the scope of conviction was remote
and bleak.
12. It will also be useful to make reference to one recent pronouncement of
the Apex Court i.e. Madhukar & Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra 2025 SCC
OnLine SC 1415. The abovesaid case also relates to offence under Section
376 IPC and, when an application was moved by the parties seeking quashing
of the proceedings on the basis of settlement, such petition was dismissed by
the jurisdictional High Court which compelled the parties to approach
Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Apex Court, while quashing the FIR, observed
that the power of the Court under Section 482 CrPC to secure the ends of
justice was not constrained by a rigid formula and must be exercised with
reference to the facts of each case.
13. Reference be also made to Danish Ali vs. State and Ors. (CRL. M.C.
1727/2019), Vivek Kumar Yadav vs. State and Ors. (CRL. M.C. 1034/2021),
Lalit Kumar Vats vs. State of NCT of Delhi and Ors. (CRL. M.C. 2384/2020)
and Vikaram Prasad Gaur & Anr vs. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr. (CRL.
M.C. 3676/2025) wherein also, the proceedings under Section 376 were
quashed on the basis of settlement.
14. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under
Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, it is deemed
appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
15. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.148/2026 dated
08.03.2026, registered at Police Station Sagar Pur, for commission of
offences under Sections 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, along
with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is, hereby, quashed
subject to petitioner's depositing total cost of Rs. 25,000/- with Delhi High
Court Staff Welfare Fund [Account no. 15530110074442: IFSC
UCBA0001553] within four weeks from today. Proof of deposit of cost,
original Settlement Agreement dated 04.04.2026 and original affidavits of the
parties be handed over to SHO/IO concerned within further two weeks.
16. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
17. The pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
APRIL 15, 2026/st/pb
