[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Deepak Sharma @Amandeep vs State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) & Ors on 20 February, 2026
$~39
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 20th February, 2026
+ CRL.M.C. 590/2026
DEEPAK SHARMA @AMANDEEP .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Himanshu Nagpal, Advocate with
petitioner in person.
versus
STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the
State with SI Sandeep, PS Bindapur
Ms. ShikhsSoni with Mr. Saurabh
Soni, Advocates with 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.477/2017 dated
12.07.2017, registered at P.S. Binda Pur, for commission of offence under
Section 354D IPC 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. She had, broadly speaking, alleged that accused
used to follow her and used to stare at her. Learned Addl. P.P. for the State
submits that when the statement of respondent No.2 was got recorded under
Section 164 Cr.P.C., it came to fore that after the abovesaid incident, when
respondent No.2 requested President of her Society to intervene in the matter,
he tried to make the petitioner understand but petitioner, rather, caused hurt to
him and, therefore, when charge-sheet was filed, offence under Section 323
IPC was also added.
3. Charge-sheet has already been filed and after ascertainment of charges,
respondent No.2 even entered into witness box and her deposition has already
been recorded.
4. Fact, however, remains that both the parties have now entered into
settlement and respondent No.2 is now no longer interested in pursuing with
the abovesaid complaint. Her affidavit to said effect is also on record.
5. Respondent No.2 is present in Court with her counsel. The
Investigating Officer (I.O.) is also present and identifies her.
6. When asked, respondent No.2, who is, reportedly, in her forties, is a
married lady. She states that she is no longer interested in pursuing with the
abovesaid case and would have no objection if the present FIR is quashed.
She submits that she has entered into settlement voluntarily and without any
fear, force and coercion from any angle whatsoever.
7. Sh. Vinod Sharma, respondent No.3, President of said Society, is also
present and he has also filed an affidavit deposing therein that he would have
no objection if the present FIR is quashed. He also submits that he has
entered into settlement without any fear, force and coercion from any corner
whatsoever.
8. Petitioner is also present in Court and undertakes to be careful in future.
9. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with
criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. In any case, even the
complainant does not wish to press any charges against the petitioner.
10. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under
Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
11. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.477/2017 dated
12.07.2017, registered at P.S. Binda Pur, for commission of offence under
Sections 354D IPC, along with all consequential proceedings emanating
therefrom, is hereby, quashed subject to petitioner depositing cost of
Rs.20,000/- with Delhi High Court Staff Welfare Fund [Account no.
15530110074442: IFSC UCBA0001553] within two weeks from today. Proof
of deposit of such cost be submitted with the Registry within one week
thereafter.
12. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 20, 2026/st/js
