Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sumit & Ors. vs State of Nct of Delhi Through Sho & Anr.

Sumit & Ors. vs State of Nct of Delhi Through Sho & Anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Jan 28, 2026
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1255046

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRL.M.C./713/2026
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sumit & Ors.

Advocate Mr. Rakesh Gaur

Respondent

State of Nct of Delhi Through Sho & Anr.

Advocate Mr. Satinder Sing Bawa, Ms. Shahina

Excerpt

.....coercion and undue influence and the dispute was personal in naturesignature not verified signed by:sonia crl.m.c. 713/2026 1 thapliyal signing date:30.01.2026 10:58:18 which was, merely on the basis of some misunderstanding amongst them. 6. it is also submitted that in terms of settlement, the petitioners have already reimbursed the expenditure which he had incurred towards his treatment and, therefore, he has no objection if the present fir is quashed. 7. ms. shahina, learned counsel for respondent no.2 is present in court and has filed her vakalatnama which is taken on record. 8. investigating officer (i.o) is present in court and confirms broad facts and also identifies the complainant. 9. in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when the dispute does not involve any public interest and is private in nature. 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. 0429/2023 dated 10.07.2023, registered at police station ps okhla industrial area, delhi for commission of offences under sections 323/324/341/506/34 ipc, along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed. 12. the petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.(manoj jain) judge january 28, 2026/sw/sasignature not verified signed by:sonia crl.m.c. 713/2026 2 thapliyal signing date:30.01.2026 10:58:18

Full Judgment

$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 28th January, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 713/2026&CRL.M.A. 2844/2026 SUMIT & ORS. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rakesh Gaur, Advocate. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH SHO & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Satinder Sing Bawa, APP with SI Shyam Bir Singh. Ms. Shahina, Advocate for R-2. 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. 0429/2023 dated 10.07.2023, registered at Police Station PS Okhla Industrial Area, Delhi for commission of offences under Sections 323/324/341/506/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 2. FIR had been lodged at the instance of respondent No.2-Mr. Lalit Panchal, arising out of a family dispute. 3. Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 are real brothers-in-laws of complainant, petitioner No.4 is his mother-in-law, and petitioner No.5 is second wife of complainant/ respondent No.2. 4. Respondent No.2 is present in the Court and submits that the matter has been amicably settled and the settlement terms have been duly recorded in Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 07.01.2026. 5. He submits that he has entered into comprise without any force, pressure, coercion and undue influence and the dispute was personal in nature

Signature Not Verified Signed By:SONIA CRL.M.C. 713/2026 1 THAPLIYAL Signing Date:30.01.2026 10:58:18 which was, merely on the basis of some misunderstanding amongst them. 6. It is also submitted that in terms of settlement, the petitioners have already reimbursed the expenditure which he had incurred towards his treatment and, therefore, he has no objection if the present FIR is quashed. 7. Ms. Shahina, learned counsel for respondent No.2 is present in Court and has filed her vakalatnama which is taken on record. 8. Investigating Officer (I.O) is present in Court and confirms broad facts and also identifies the complainant. 9. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when the dispute does not involve any public interest and is private in nature. 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. 0429/2023 dated 10.07.2023, registered at Police Station PS Okhla Industrial Area, Delhi for commission of offences under Sections 323/324/341/506/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed. 12. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE JANUARY 28, 2026/sw/sa

Signature Not Verified Signed By:SONIA CRL.M.C. 713/2026 2 THAPLIYAL Signing Date:30.01.2026 10:58:18

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial