Delhi High Court: A petition was filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (BNSS) in the ‘In-Flight Staring’ row, seeking quashing of FIR dated 29-05-2024 registered at Police Station IGI Airport under Section 509 of Penal Code, 1860, (IPC) and all proceedings emanating therefrom. Ravinder Dudeja, J., quashed the FIR and held that no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR as both the parties have settled the matter amicably.
The genesis of the FIR lay in an incident dated 28-05-2024 when the complainant, Respondent 2, was on flight no. 91928 from Indore to Delhi. She alleged that the petitioner, a co-passenger, persistently stared at her in a manner that caused her discomfort. Upon landing at the IGI Airport, she submitted a written complaint to the police, which led to the registration of the impugned FIR the next day. Following the initiation of proceedings, the parties resolved the dispute amicably. With the help of their well-wishers, they executed a Settlement Agreement dated 16-12-2024, which was placed on record.
On 22-05-2025, the matter was placed before the Joint Registrar who recorded statements of both parties. The petitioner and Respondent 2 independently affirmed the amicable resolution of their dispute and attested that the settlement had been reached voluntarily, without any form of coercion, pressure, or undue influence. The Investigating Officer from PS IGI Airport verified the identity of both parties and confirmed the genuine settlement. A separate statement from the Investigating Officer was also recorded, and all counsels endorsed that the settlement was voluntary and duly signed.
The Joint Registrar, after direct interaction with both parties, found their consent to be genuine. In view of these developments, the matter was placed before the High Court for final adjudication. On the date of the hearing, 30-05-2025, both parties were present along with their respective counsels and were again identified by the Investigating Officer. Respondent 2 reiterated her statement that the matter had been amicably settled without any fear or coercion and stated that she had no objection to the FIR in the ‘In-Flight Staring’ row being quashed.
The Court considered the submission of the Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State, who too expressed no objection to the quashing of the FIR and the consequent proceedings in light of the settlement. The Court referred to the authoritative judgment of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, where it was observed that the Court must assess whether continuing with the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law when the victim and the alleged offender have settled the matter amicably. If it is in the interest of justice to bring such proceedings to an end, the Court is well within its jurisdiction to do so.
Considering the facts and circumstances, including the settlement arrived at and the statements recorded, the Court found that no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings arising from FIR in the ‘In-Flight Staring’ row. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the petition was allowed. The FIR registered under Section 509 IPC at PS IGI Airport, along with all proceedings emanating therefrom, stood quashed. Consequently, the writ petition and all pending applications were disposed of.
[Prashant Pareek v. State, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 4233, decided on 20-05-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Anubhav Mehrotra and Mr. Sanjeev Malik, Advs. With along with petitioner
Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC with SI Beena, PS-IGI Airport.
Mr. Rana Kunal, Adv for R2 with R2 in person
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
