Vishal Chaudhary vs. State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Vishal Chaudhary, approached the Delhi High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita seeking to quash FIR No. 801/2022, registered at PS Adarsh Nagar, Delhi. The FIR was lodged by respondent no. 2 for offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120B of the IPC. The complainant alleged that the petitioner defaulted on payments for FMCG goods, including cigarettes and pan masala, worth ₹1,55,38,576/-, by fabricating and uploading fake GST invoices. During the proceedings, the parties reached an amicable settlement through a Settlement Agreement dated 15.09.2025, wherein the petitioner agreed to pay ₹75,00,000/-. The petitioner has reportedly paid the entire settlement amount as per the schedule.
Held
The Court held that in cases where parties have amicably resolved their disputes, the High Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash criminal proceedings to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of law. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's decisions in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab and B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, which permit the quashing of non-compoundable offences when there is a settlement between the victim and the wrongdoer, and continuation of proceedings would be unfair or contrary to the interests of justice. In this case, the parties had amicably resolved their differences out of their own free will and without coercion. Therefore, it was in the interest of justice to quash the FIR and all consequential proceedings. The Court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 801/2022, subject to the petitioner depositing ₹25,000/- as cost with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within one month.
Key Issues
1. Whether the FIR No. 801/2022, registered under Sections 406/420/467/468/471/120B IPC, and all proceedings emanating therefrom, should be quashed on the basis of an amicable settlement between the petitioner and respondent no. 2? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the parties have amicably resolved their disputes, as evidenced by the Settlement Agreement dated 15.09.2025, and the entire settlement amount has been paid. Therefore, continuing the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law and contrary to the interests of justice. Reliance was placed on the principles laid down in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675. Respondents' contention: The State (respondent no. 1) and respondent no. 2 (complainant) both stated they have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the settlement.
Sections Cited
Section 528, Section 406, Section 420, Section 467, Section 468, Section 471, Section 120B, Section 482
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT(ORAL) RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 801/2022, dated 07.08.2022, registered at P.S Adarsh Nagar, Delhi under Sections 406/420/467/468/471/120B IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties. CRL.M.C. 7250/2025 2. The factual matrix giving rise to the instant case is that the respondent no. 2/complainant had supplied FMCG goods, including cigarettes and pan masala, worth ₹1,55,38,576/-.( Rupees One Crore Fifty Five Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Seventy Six Only) to petitioner who later defaulted on payments by fabricating and uploading fake GST invoices to create a fictitious liability against respondent no.
FIR No. 801/2022 was lodged at the instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Adarsh Nagar under sections 406/ 420/ 467/ 468/471/120B IPC against the petitioner.
During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes and the terms of settlement were written in the form of a Settlement Agreement dated 15.09.2025. It is submitted that petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lac only) to respondent no. 2 as per the schedule in the settlement. Copy of the Settlement Agreement dated 15.09.2025 has been annexed as Annexure P-2. 4. Parties have entered their appearance through VC with respective advocates, present physically before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Sargam, from PS Adarsh Nagar.
Respondent No. 2/ authorized representative confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioner without any force, fear, coercion and he has received the entire settlement amount and he CRL.M.C. 7250/2025 has no objection if the FIR No. 801/2022 is quashed against the Petitioner.
In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 801/2022 is quashed.
In Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under:- "
In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its juri iction to quash the criminal proceedings."
Further, it is settled that the inherent powers under section 482 of the Code are required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of any court. Further, the High Court can quash non-compoundable offences after considering the nature of the offence and the amicable settlement between the concerned parties. Reliance may be placed upon B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675. CRL.M.C. 7250/2025 9. In view of the above facts that the parties have amicably resolved their differences out of their own free will and without any coercion. Hence, it would be in the interest of justice, to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 801/2022, dated 07.08.2022, registered at P.S Adarsh Nagar, Delhi under section 406/ 420/ 467/ 468/ 471/ 120B IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed, subject to petitioner depositing Rs. 25,000/- as cost with Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a period of one month.
Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. RAVINDER DUDEJA, J November 01, 2025 MA
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.