[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Ms Ruchika Mitra & Ors vs State ( Nct Of Delhi) & Anr on 15 January, 2026
$~54
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 15th January, 2026
+ CRL.M.C. 347/2026
MS RUCHIKA MITRA & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Kamlesh Kumar, Advocate with
petitioners.
versus
STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the
State with SI Rahul Malik, PS Maurya
Enclave.
Mr. Arjun Arora, 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. The present petition seeks quashing of FIR No.224/2025 dated
02.06.2025, registered at Police Station Maurya Enclave, Delhi for
commission of offences under Sections 126(2)/61(2)/356(2)/351(2)/3(5) of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (corresponding Sections
341/120B/500/506/34 IPC), along with all consequential proceedings
emanating therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the
parties.
2. Respondent No.2 is Principal in Abhinav Public School, Pitampura and
on the date of incident, when she came to the school, she was prevented from
entering the school premises by two school teachers i.e. petitioner Nos.1 and
2, allegedly at the behest of the Managing Committee Member i.e. petitioner
No.3.
3. Chargesheet is, reportedly, under scrutiny.
4. However, after the abovesaid incident, the parties sat together and were
able to resolve all their disputes, amicably.
5. According to the petitioners, the incident had happened on account of
some misunderstanding and there was never any motive to insult, abuse or
threaten anyone, much less, respondent No.2, who continues as Principal of
abovesaid school.
6. The offences in question pertain to wrongful restraint, insult and
criminal intimidation.
7. Respondent No.2 is present in person and is represented by her counsel.
8. The Investigating Officer (I.O.) is present and identifies the
complainant/respondent No.2.
9. Respondent No.2 has also filed her affidavit. She submits that she
has settled all her disputes with the petitioners and since the dispute was
trivial in nature, she is not interested in pursuing with the abovesaid case and
would have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.
10. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with
criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when dispute
does not involve any public interest and is, primarily, private in nature. In any
case, even the complainant does not wish to press any charges against the
petitioners.
11. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under
Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
12. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.224/2025 dated
02.06.2025, registered at Police Station Maurya Enclave, Delhi for the
alleged offences under Section 126(2)/61(2)/356(2)/351(2)/3(5) of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), along with all consequential proceedings emanating
therefrom, is hereby, quashed.
13. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
JANUARY 15, 2026
st/js
