Satish Sharma vs State (Nct Of Delhi)

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in quashing the FIR No. 382 of 2010 under Sections 323, 324, 506, and 34 IPC based solely on a compromise deed, as not all injured parties were heard. The Court emphasized that the presence of all injured parties is crucial in such proceedings, and the compromise should not negate the right to a fair hearing. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the High Court's decision to quash the FIR due to the compromise reached between the parties.