Delhi High Court
Nitesh Singh & Ors vs State (Nct) Of Delhi & Anr on 11 July, 2025
$~84
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 11.07.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ CRL.M.C. 1906/2025
NITESH SINGH & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Prabhat Chaurasia, Mr.
Anirudh Jamwal and Mr. Rajpal
Singh, Advs. with petitioner
no.1 in person and petitioner
no.2 & 3 through VC.
versus
STATE (NCT) OF DELHI & ANR . ... Respondents
Through: Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP
for the State with SI Satender,
PS Katju Marg.
Ms. Kiran Singh, Adv. for R2
alongwith R2 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, 2023, seeking quashing of FIR No. 0086/2020,
dated 17.03.2020, registered at P.S KN Katju Marg under sections
498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the
basis of settlement between the parties.
2. The marriage between Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.2
was solemnized on 24.05.2013 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. A
boy namely Advit Pratap Singh was born on 04.01.2015 out of the
said wedlock. It is submitted that due to temperamental differences,
the couple started living separately since 26.06.2016. Thereafter,
Respondent No.2 filed the following cases against Petitioner No.1 and
his family members:
i. FIR No. 0086/2020, dated 17.03.2020, registered at P.S KN
Katju Marg under sections 498A/406/34 IPC
ii. Complaint case under section 12 read with section 17, 18, 19,
20, 22 and 23 of DV Act
iii. Maintenance case under section 125 Cr.P.C.
iv. Execution petition bearing Ex. Crl. No. 219/2023
The Petitioner No.1 filed a petition bearing Crl. M.C. no. 595/2024
against the Respondent No.2.
3. During the proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their
disputes and executed a Settlement Deed dated 29.05.2024. In
pursuance of the Settlement, the parties jointly filed a fresh petition for
divorce by mutual consentunder Section 13B(1) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955. The learned Family Court, Rohini Courts allowed
the mutual divorce petition on 28.10.2024, thereby dissolving the
marriage between the Petitioner and Respondent No.2. It is submitted
that all the previous complaints and litigations initiated by the parties
has been withdrawn and all conditions of the Settlement Agreement
have been fulfilled including the payment of the total settlement
amount of Rs. 55,00,000/- (Rupees fifty five lacs) as per the schedule
mentioned in the Settlement Deed. The copy of Settlement Deed dated
29.05.2024 has been placed on record as Annexure P-3.
4. Petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 are physically present
before the Court while petitioner no.2 & 3 have entered their
appearance through VC. They have been identified by their respective
counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Satender from PS
Katju Marg.
5. Respondent No.2 confirms that the matter has been settled with
the petitionerswithout any force, fear, coercion and she has received
the payment of the entire settlement amount of Rs. 55,00,000/-
(Rupees fifty five lacs) from the Petitioner No.1 as per the schedule
mentioned in the Settlement Deed. She further submits that she has no
objection if the FIR No. 0086/2020 is quashed against the Petitioners.
6. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned
Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the
present FIR No. 0086/2020 is quashed.
7. In Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon'ble
Supreme Courthas recognized the need of amicable resolution of
disputes by observing as under:-
"61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would
be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the
criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings
would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and
compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to
secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put
to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the
affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to
quash the criminal proceedings."
8. In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the fact that parties
have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in
continuing with the present FIR No. 0086/2020, dated 17.03.2020,
registered at P.S KN Katju Marg under sections 498A/406/34 IPC and
all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom.
9. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No.
0086/2020, dated 17.03.2020, registered at P.S KN Katju Marg under
sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding
emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.
10. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
11. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
JULY 11, 2025
AK
