[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Pran Nath & Ors vs State (Through Sho Ps Mandawali) & Anr on 11 March, 2026
$~68
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 11th March, 2026
+ CRL.M.C. 1774/2026 & CRL.M.A. 7270/2026
PRAN NATH & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Yogesh Sharma, Advocate
versus
STATE (THROUGH SHO PS MANDAWALI) & ANR.
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for the State with
SI Ankit Kumar, PS Mandwali
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 423/2025 dated 10.10.2025,
registered at P.S. Mandawali Fazal Pur, for commission of offence under
Sections 318(4)/336(3)/338/340(2)/3(5) of BNSS (corresponding Sections
420/468/467/471/34 IPC) along with all consequential proceedings arising,
therefrom.
2. Charge-sheet is yet to be filed.
3. The FIR in question was registered at the instance of respondent no.2
Sh. Rajesh Khillan, who stated that the petitioners had cheated him by trying
to sell a property which was not free from encumbrances. After making part
payment of Rs.70 lakhs, when he had gone for the registration of the
abovesaid property, he learnt that the property could not have been sold as
there was some case going on regarding the property and that there was a
'stay' as well. He also made some allegation of forgery against the petitioners.
4. Admittedly, pursuant to the registration of said FIR, five such accused
persons i.e. petitioner Nos. 1,2,4,5 and 6 were arrested and taken into judicial
custody, while petitioner no.3 was not arrested during investigation.
5. However, since the matter was, essentially, civil in nature, with the
help of elders of the family and some common acquaintances, the parties have
been able to resolve all their disputes and the entire amount of the
complainant has been refunded to him and, resultantly, a settlement took
place between the parties on 14.01.2026. Copy of such Settlement Deed is
also on record.
6. Respondent no.2, who is stated to be, presently, in Dubai, has joined
the proceedings through video conferencing. SI Ankit Kumar is present in
court and has identified him.
7. Respondent no.2 reiterates the terms of settlement and claims that he
has entered into settlement without any force and coercion. He reiterated that
it was a case of failed commercial transaction and he has already settled the
matter and has also gotten back the amount which he had paid in relation to
the purchase of abovesaid property and that he is not left with any grievance
in the present matter and would have 'no objection' if the FIR in question is
quashed.
8. Respondent no.2 also submits that, in view of the settlement, he is left
with no interest or right to claim over the property in question.
9. Petitioner no.1-Mr.Pran Nath has joined the proceedings through video
conferencing on account of old age while the other petitioners are present in
Court.
10. Heard.
11. Ostensibly, the matter looks civil in nature. Moreover, as far as offence
under Section 420 is concerned, it is compoundable. Complainant, the
actually aggrieved person, does not want any further action in view of
amicable settlement.
12. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 423/2025 dated
10.10.2025, registered at P.S. Mandawali Fazal Pur, for commission of
offence under Sections 318(4)/336(3)/338/340(2)/3(5) of BNSS
(corresponding Sections 420/468/467/471/34 IPC) along with all
consequential proceedings arising, therefrom, is hereby, quashed subject to
cost of Rs. 50,000/- to be deposited by petitioner with Delhi High Court Staff
Welfare Fund [Account no. 15530110074442: IFSC UCBA0001553] within
four weeks from today.
13. Proof of deposit of such cost as well as original affidavits of petitioners
and respondent No.2, copies of which have been filed with the present
petition, shall be handed over to I.O. within further one week.
14. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
15. Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
MARCH 11, 2026/rr/pb
