[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Mrs Laxmi Kaur & Ors vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 19 February, 2026
$~65
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 19th February, 2026
+ CRL.M.C. 1401/2026 & CRL.M.A. 5625/2026
MRS. LAXMI KAUR & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Devesh Pratap Singh with
Ms. Nidhi Dalal, Advocates with
petitioners in person.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the
State with SI Deepak Dhanda, PS
Govindpuri
Mr. Aakash Bansal, Advocate for
respondent No.2 with respondent
No.2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No.381/2024 dated
14.07.2024, registered at P.S. Govind Puri, for commission of offences
under Sections 420/467/468/471/34 IPC along with all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at
between the parties.
2. The case is still under investigation and charge-sheet has yet not been
filed.
3. Essentially, the dispute is between close family members.
4. The abovesaid FIR was registered on the basis of complaint made by
Ms Kalawati, aged around 85 years.
5. In her complaint dated 14.07.2024, she claimed that she was resident
of RZ-234, Gali No.18-19, Tughlakabad Extension, New Delhi. She has six
sons and three daughters. In the year 2011, her husband was hospitalized
and since she was busy taking care of her husband, her one son Sh. Jaswant
Singh requested her to appoint him as her attorney to manage the abovesaid
property. Believing him, she went to the office of sub-Registrar where some
documentation was done on 06.09.2011, where few of her family members
also signed as witnesses.
6. She, later, learnt that after the appointment of her said son as her
attorney, her son executed a gift deed with respect to third floor portion with
roof rights in favour of his wife Ms. Laxmi. Her son Jaswant Singh,
allegedly, created fake documents by forging her signatures and when she
learnt about such fraud, she reported the matter to police.
7. It was in the abovesaid backdrop that she wanted action to be taken
against her such son and other family members.
8. Fact remains that besides the abovesaid FIR, three other civil matters
were filed which related to the abovesaid property.
9. During pendency of such matters, all the concerned parties have
entered into settlement. The settlement has taken place under the aegis of
Mediation Centre, Saket Courts, New Delhi and the broad terms of
settlement are found recorded in Mediation Order dated 08.10.2025.
10. All the petitioners are present physically in Court.
11. Respondent No.2 is present in person with her counsel Sh. Aakash
Bansal.
12. The Investigating Officer (I.O.) is also present and identifies her.
13. The terms of settlement have been reiterated by respondent No.2.
When a query was put to her, she stated that as per the terms of settlement,
the abovesaid property would now be sold and the proceeds would be
divided in seven equal shares amongst her six sons and herself. She submits
that it is also decided that a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- would go to each of her
three daughters. She states that on account of pendency of the present
criminal matter, they are not able to execute Sale Deed, though, agreement
to sell has been executed and it is, therefore, prayed that since the matter has
been amicably settled, she would have no objection if FIR in question is
quashed. She states that she has now no grievance against anyone.
14. The daughter of respondent No.2 Smt. Ravinder Kaur is present. She
is also one of the signatories of the MOU and submits that she would take
care of the residence-aspect of her mother, for future, once the property is
sold.
15. As noted, matter is between very close family members and they all
have been able to settle the matter amongst themselves and, therefore, there
is no impediment in quashing FIR, when dominant offence is of cheating
which is compoundable in nature. Reference be made to Ompraksh Gupta v.
State (NCT of Delhi): 2020 SCC OnLine Del 2387, wherein Coordinate
Bench of this Court, in a petition seeking quashing of matter relating to
forgery and fabrication of documents, held that as the dispute between close
relatives had been amicably settled prior to filing of charge-sheet, and as the
case did not involve any serious offence or societal interest, a liberal
approach in terms of Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab: 2014 SCC OnLine
SC 265 is warranted. Reference is also made to the decision of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.: (2012) 10 SCC
303 in this context.
16. Keeping in mind the aforesaid, and also in order to facilitate the
parties in maintaining and restoring cordiality, the proceedings in the present
case deserve to be quashed. In any case, even the complainant does not wish
to press any charges against the petitioners.
17. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under
Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
18. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.381/2024 dated
14.07.2024, registered at P.S. Govind Puri, for commission of offences
under Sections 420/467/468/471/34 IPC, along with all consequential
proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed subject to petitioners
depositing cost of Rs.10,000/- each with Delhi Legal Services Authority
(South-East District) within two weeks from today.
19. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
20. Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 19, 2026/st/js
