Delhi High Court
Nitin Jain vs State & Anr on 16 October, 2025
$~72
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 16.10.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ CRL.M.C. 7377/2025 & CRL.M.A. 30965/2025 EXEMPTION
FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES ETC.
NITIN JAIN. .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anuj Jain, Adv. with
petitioner in person.
versus
STATE & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP.
Ms. Khushbu Jindal, 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. 76/2013, dated
21.02.2013, registered at P.S Shalimar Bagh, Delhi under Sections
498A/406 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 24.04.2012 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies at
New Delhi. No child was born out of the said wedlock and is in care
and custody of the Respondent No. 2. However, on account of
temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1and Respondent No. 2 are
living separately since 16.06.2012.
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. 76/2013 was lodged at the
instance of Respondent No. 2 at PS Shalimar Bagh under sections
498A/406 IPC against the Petitioner No.1. Subsequently chargesheet
was filed under sections 498A/406 IPC.
4. During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved
their disputes and the terms of settlement were written in the form of a
Memorandum of Understanding dated 01.02.2016. It is submitted that
Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No. 2 have obtained divorce on
28.03.2017 and Petitioner No. 1 has paid Rs. 8,00,000/-(Rupees Eight
Lakh) to Respondent no. 2 as full and final settlement as per the
schedule in the settlement. Copy of the Memorandum of
Understanding dated 01.02.2016 has been annexed as Annexure P-2.
5. Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been
identified by their respective counsels.
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 amount and has no objection if the
FIR No. 076/2013 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. 76/2013 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.
76/2013 dated 21.06.2013, registered at P.S Shalimar Bagh, Delhi
under section 498A/406 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 16, 2025
MA
