DEEPAK SHARMA @AMANDEEP vs STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 20th February, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 590/2026 DEEPAK SHARMA @AMANDEEP .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Himanshu Nagpal, Advocate with petitioner in person. versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State with SI Sandeep, PS Bindapur Ms. ShikhsSoni with Mr. Saurabh Soni, Advocates with respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner herein seeks quashing of FIR No.477/2017 dated 12.07.2017, registered at P.S. Binda Pur, for commission of offence under Section 354D IPC along with all 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 made by respondent No.2 herein. She had, broadly speaking, alleged that accused used to follow her and used to stare at her. Learned Addl. P.P. for the State submits that when the statement of respondent No.2 was got recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it came to fore that after the abovesaid incident, when respondent No.2 requested President of her Society to intervene in the matter, he tried to make the petitioner understand but petitioner, rather, caused hurt to him and, therefore, when charge-sheet was filed, offence under Section 323 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CRL.M.C.590/2026 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:21.02.2026 16:46:16 IPC was also added. 3. Charge-sheet has already been filed and after ascertainment of charges, respondent No.2 even entered into witness box and her deposition has already been recorded. 4. Fact, however, remains that both the parties have now entered into settlement and respondent No.2 is now no longer interest