Delhi High Court
Manish Yadav vs The State Of N.C.T. Of Delhi & Anr on 9 October, 2025
$~09
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 09.10.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ CRL.M.C. 9848/2024 & & CRL.M.A. 37753/2024
EXEMPTION
MANISH YADAV .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Nazma Akhtar, Advocate.
Petitioner in person.
versus
THE STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ANR. ... Respondents
Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastav, APP with
SI Amit Beniwal, PS-M.S.
Park.
Respondent No. 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. 153/2018, dated
03.06.2018, registered at P.S Mansarovar Park, Delhi under Sections
498A 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 and Respondent no. 2/complainant was
solemnized on 24.02.2012 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies at New
Delhi. One child was born out of the said wedlock. However, on
account of temperamental differences Petitioner and Respondent No. 2
are living separately since 26.05.2017.
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 petitioner. FIR No. 153/2018 was lodged at instance
of Respondent no. 2 under sections 498A IPC against the petitioner.
4. During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved
their disputes and the terms of the compromise were reduced into
writing in the form of a Memorandum of Understanding dated
17.09.2020. It is submitted that petitioner and respondent no. 2 have
obtained divorce on 22.05.2019 and petitioner has paid the entire
settlement amount of Rs. 1,30,000/- (Rupees One Lac Thirty
Thousand only) as per the schedule in the settlement. It is also
submitted that the custody of the child is with respondent no. 2. Copy
of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 17.09.2020 has been
annexed as Annexure P-1.
5. Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been
identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating
Officer SI Amit Beniwal, from PS Mansarovar Park.
6. Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably
settled with the petitioner without any force, fear, coercion and she has
received the entire settlement amount and has no objection if the FIR
No. 153/2018 is quashed against the Petitioner.
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. 153/2018 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. Hence, 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.
153/2018, dated 03.06.2018, registered at P.S Mansarovar Park, Delhi
under section 498A 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
October 09, 2025
SK
