Delhi High Court

CRL.M.C./7263/2026 of RAISUDDIN MALIK Vs STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. on 28 September 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010465442026 + CRL.M.C. 7263/2026 & CRL.M.A. 30372/2026 RAISUDDIN MALIK .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Jai Bhagwan Das, Adv. versus STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP for State. SI Deepak

$~46

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

#

CNR No. DLHC010465442026

+

CRL.M.C. 7263/2026 & CRL.M.A. 30372/2026

RAISUDDIN MALIK

.....Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Jai Bhagwan Das, Adv.

versus

STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondents

Through:

Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP for

State.

SI Deepak Panwar, P.S. Daryaganj

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

O R D E R

% 28.09.2026

1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’], seeking quashing of FIR No. 110/2024 dated 29.02.2024, registered at Police Station Darya Ganj, Central District, Delhi, under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom in SC No. 691/2024, titled “State v. Raisuddin Malik”, pending before the learned Special Judge, Electricity-02, Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, on the basis of settlement between the parties

3. Issue notice. The learned APP for the State accepts notice on behalf of the State.

4. The petitioner and respondent no. 2 [through its authorised representative] are present before this Court and the petitioner has been duly identified by his learned counsel and the concerned Investigating Officer [IO].

5. Briefly stated, the aforesaid FIR was registered at the instance of Respondent No. 2 in relation to allegations of theft/unauthorised use of electricity at the premises in question. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 was filed against the petitioner.

6. During the pendency of the proceedings, disputes between the parties were stated to have been amicably settled. In the order dated 15.05.2026, the learned Special Judge recorded that 27 matters involving the petitioner and his son had been settled for a consolidated amount of ₹4,25,000/-, which stood paid to Respondent No. 2. The representative of Respondent No. 2 acknowledged the settlement and stated that the company had no objection to the petitioner being afforded an opportunity to seek quashing of the settled matters. The petitioner was accordingly granted interim bail to enable him to approach the appropriate Court for quashing.

7. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 2 on advance notice, submits that, as per instructions, the entire settled amount has been received by Respondent No. 2 and nothing remains outstanding against the petitioner in respect of the present matter. It is further submitted that Respondent No. 2 has no objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom.

8. On a query made by this Court, Respondent No. 2 through its authorised representative has stated that the disputes between the parties were amicably settled and that the settlement was arrived at voluntarily and without any pressure, coercion, undue influence or threat. It is further stated that the entire settled amount stands paid and that Respondent No. 2 has no objection if the aforesaid FIR is quashed.

9. In view of the above, since the parties have amicably resolved their disputes and the settled amount stands paid to the satisfaction of Respondent No. 2, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings. Respondent No. 2 has also expressed its no objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR. In these circumstances, this Court is of the view that the interest of justice would be served by bringing the proceedings to an end. Accordingly, the aforesaid FIR and all proceedings arising therefrom are liable to be quashed

10. Accordingly, FIR No. 110/2024 dated 29.02.2024, registered at Police Station Darya Ganj, Central District, Delhi, under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom in SC No. 691/2024, titled “State v. Raisuddin Malik”, pending before the learned Special Judge, Electricity-02, Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, are hereby quashed.

11. Therefore, the present petition is allowed and thereby, disposed of.

12. The pending application also stands disposed of.

13. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned learned Trial Court for necessary information and compliance.

14. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 28, 2026/prg/PG

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead