[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Ajay Kumar And Ors vs The State Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 24 December, 2025
$~42
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 24.12.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ W.P.(CRL) 4314/2025
AJAY KUMAR AND ORS .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar, Adv. with all
petitioners in person.
versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Anand V. Khatri, ASC with
SI Jaimal, SI Jaiveer Kumar
P.S. Palam Village SI Sourabh
Malik, PS KNK Marg.
Mr. Paramveer, Mr. Raj Kumar,
Advs. 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 Article 226 of Constitution of India
read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
seeking quashing of FIR No. 0482/2023, dated 29.07.2023, registered
at P.S Palam Village, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/506/34 IPC 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 01.12.2019 according to Hindu rites and customs.
However, on account of temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1
and Respondent No. 2 started living separately.
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. 0482/2018 was lodged at the
instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Palam Village under sections
498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners.
4. It has been submitted that, parties have amicably resolved their
disputes before Counselling Cell, Rohini Courts, New Delhi and the
terms of settlement were written in the form of Settlement dated
22.03.2025. It is submitted that the petitioner No. 1 and respondent
No. 2 have happily resumed and started cohabitation since 22.03.2025,
and are presently living together peacefully and harmoniously, without
any dispute or grievance against each other as per the schedule in the
settlement. Copy of the settlement dated 22.03.2025 has been annexed
as Annexure B.
5. Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been
identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating
Officer SI Jaimal, SI Jaiveer Kumar from P.S. Palam Village.
6. Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably
settled with the petitioner without any force, fear, coercion and she has
has no objection if the FIR No. 0482/2018 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. 0482/2018 is 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 of FIR
No. 0482/2023, dated 29.07.2023, registered at P.S Palam Village,
Delhi under Sections 498A/406/506/34 IPC 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 24, 2025
MA
