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.

Hemant Kumar & Ors. vs State (Govt.of Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Hemant Kumar & Ors. vs State (Govt.of Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Apr 20, 2026
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1262395

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./2922/2026
Subject
MRTP

Case Summary

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

MRTP

Key legal issue
MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Hemant Kumar & Ors.

Advocate Mr. Atinder Kumar, Mr. Yash Goyal, Mr. Raj Kumar, Ms. Preeti, Ms. Deepti

Respondent

State (Govt.of Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Excerpt

.....language and made obscene gestures. when respondent no.2 started recording their such act, she was assaulted. petitioner no.5 is mother of petitioner no.1.3. the matter is still under investigation and charge-sheet is yet to befiled.4. fact, however, remains that the parties have entered into compromiseand copy of compromise deed dated 11.04.2026 has also been placed on record, which is signed by all the petitioners as well as respondent no.2.5. respondent no. 2 is present in person along with her counsel.investigating officer is also present. she has been duly identified by her counsel and investigating officer.6. she reiterates the terms of settlement and submits that beingneighbours, they have amicably resolved all their disputes and she has forgiven the petitioners and has agreed that she would cooperate in quashing of the fir. she states that she has entered into the abovesaid settlement voluntarily, without any coercion and influence from any corner whatsoever and therefore, she would have ‘no objection’ if fir in question is quashed.7. petitioners are present in person and feel apologetic for the incident inquestion.8. petitioner no.1 undertakes not to indulge in such type of activities,again.9. in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing withcriminal 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.thapliyal crl.m.c. 2922/2026 210. accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this court undersection 528 of bharatiya nagarik suraksha sanhita, 2023, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant fir.11. consequently, to secure the ends of justice, fir no. 125/2026 datedconsequential proceedings arising therefrom, is, hereby, quashed subject to petitioners’ depositing total cost of rs. 20,000/-.....

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 20th April, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 2922/2026 HEMANT KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Atinder Kumar with Mr. Yash Goyal, Advocates with petitioners in person.

versus

STATE (GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for the State with SI Anil Kumar, HC Shankar, PS Dabri. Ms. Preeti with Ms. Deepti, Advocates 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. 125/2026 dated

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 lodged

by respondent No.2 (name withheld). The incident is of 28.01.2026, when respondent No.2 was returning to her home after dropping her children at the school. Petitioner No.1, who is her neighbor, was present with his friends in

THAPLIYAL CRL.M.C. 2922/2026 1

balcony of his house and used filthy language and made obscene gestures. When respondent No.2 started recording their such act, she was assaulted. Petitioner No.5 is mother of petitioner No.1.

3. The matter is still under investigation and charge-sheet is yet to be

filed.

4. Fact, however, remains that the parties have entered into compromise

and copy of Compromise Deed dated 11.04.2026 has also been placed on record, which is signed by all the petitioners as well as respondent No.2.

5. Respondent No. 2 is present in person along with her counsel.

Investigating officer is also present. She has been duly identified by her counsel and Investigating Officer.

6. She reiterates the terms of settlement and submits that being

neighbours, they have amicably resolved all their disputes and she has forgiven the petitioners and has agreed that she would cooperate in quashing of the FIR. She states that she has entered into the abovesaid settlement voluntarily, without any coercion and influence from any corner whatsoever and therefore, she would have ‘no objection’ if FIR in question is quashed.

7. Petitioners are present in person and feel apologetic for the incident in

question.

8. Petitioner No.1 undertakes not to indulge in such type of activities,

again.

9. 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.

THAPLIYAL CRL.M.C. 2922/2026 2

10. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under

Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.

11. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 125/2026 dated

consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is, hereby, quashed subject to petitioners’ depositing total cost of Rs. 20,000/- in the account of Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within two weeks from today. Proof of deposit of cost, Original Compromise Deed dated 11.04.2026 and original affidavits of the parties, copies of which have been placed on record in the present proceedings, shall be handed over to the concerned SHO/IO within further two weeks.

12. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE APRIL 20, 2026 st/js

THAPLIYAL CRL.M.C. 2922/2026 3

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial