[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Zuber Ali Alias Mohd Zuber & Ors vs The State Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 10 December, 2025
$~84
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 10.12.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ CRL.M.C. 8819/2025 & CRL.M.A. 36771/2025 EXEMPTION
FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPY
ZUBER ALI ALIAS MOHD ZUBER & ORS. .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, Mr. Anshul
Goyal, Advs. with P-1 to 3 and
P-5 in person. P-4 through VC.
versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP with SI
Sudhanshu, PS Seelampur.
Mr. Irshad Parveen, Adv. for R-
2 with R-2 in person.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
JUDGMENT(ORAL)
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
1. This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 0538/2018, dated
31.12.2018, registered at P.S Seelampur, Delhi under Sections
498A/406/34 IPC & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and all proceedings
emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.
2. The factual matrix giving rise to the instant case is that the
marriage between Petitioner No.1 and Respondent no. 2/complainant
was solemnized on 17.09.2016 as per Muslim Rites and ceremonies.
One child was born out of the said wedlock. However, on account of
temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 are
living separately since 20.10.2017
3. As per averments made in the FIR, Respondent No. 2 was
subjected to physical and mental harassment on account of dowry
demands by the petitioners.FIR No. 0538/2018 was lodged at the
instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Seelampur under sections
498A/406/34 IPC & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against the
petitioners.
4. During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved
their disputes before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma
Courts, New Delhi and the terms of settlement were written in the
form of Settlement dated 19.08.2025. Thereafter the parties entered
into a settlement deed/Divorce deed dated 04.11.2025 and the
petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce by mutual
consent as per Talaq-e-hasan where in the first divorce was given on
11.06.2025, the second divorce on 13.07.2025 and the final divorce on
10.08.2025. It is submitted that the petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire
settlement amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lac Fifty Thousand
Only) to respondent no. 2. It is further submitted that the custody of
the minor child shall remain with the respondent no. 2 and petitioner
no. 1 shall not claim custody or visitation rights as per the schedule in
the settlement. Copy of the settlement agreement dated 19.08.2025
and deed dated 04.11.2025 has been annexed as Annexure P-2 & P-3.
5. Petitioners no. 1 to 3, Petitioner no. 5 and respondent no. 2 are
physically present before the Court while petitioner no. 4 has entered
her appearance through VC. They have been identified by their
respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI
Sudhanshu, from PS Seelampur.
6. Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably
settled with the petitioners without any force, fear, coercion and she
has received the entire settlement and has no objection if the FIR No.
0538/2018 is quashed against the Petitioners.
7. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned
Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the
present FIR No. 0538/2018is quashed.
8. Hon'ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable
settlement of disputes in Rangappa Javoor vs The State Of
Karnataka And Another, Diary No. 33313/2019, 2023 LiveLaw (SC)
74, Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. vs Babita Raghuvanshi & Anr.,
(2013) 4 SCC 58 & in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC
9. 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. Supreme Court and this Court have repeatedly held that the
cases arising out of matrimonial differences should be put to a quietus
if the parties have reached an amicable settlement. Reliance may be
placed upon B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC.
10. In view of the above facts that the parties have amicably
resolved their differences out of their own free will and without any
coercion, it would be in the interest of justice, to quash the
abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
11. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No.
0538/2018, dated 31.12.2018, registered at P.S Seelampur, Delhi
under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and
all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby
quashed.
12. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
13. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
December 10, 2025
MA
