Delhi High Court
Sandeep Srivastava & Ors vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 15 September, 2025
$~87
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 15.09.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ CRL.M.C. 6531/2025
SANDEEP SRIVASTAVA & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. P.K. Pandey, Mr. A.D.
Dubey, Mr. Abhay Chaturvedi,
Mr. Sumit Solanki, Advs. All
petitioners in person.
versus
STATEOF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP with SI
Ravi Malik PS Vasant Kunj.
Mr. Ayan Sharma, Mr. Dhruv
Saini, Mr. Ayush 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 Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 0005/2025, dated
04.01.2025, registered at P.S Vasant Kunj, Delhi under Sections
498A/406/34 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 17.07.2021 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 No. 1 and Respondent
No. 2 are living separately since 13.04.2024.
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. 0005/2025 was lodged at instance
of respondent no. 2 under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the
petitioners.
4. It has been submitted that during the pendency of the
proceedings parties have settled their disputes before the counselor
attached with the Family Courts, Patiala House Courts and the terms
of compromise were reduced into writing in the form of settlement
deed dated 06.06.2025. It is submitted that petitioner no. 1 has made
payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- to respondent no. 2 at the time of first
motion and has made further payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- by way of
demand draft today. The balance amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- will be
paid at the time of second motion listed before the Family Court on
16.10.2025. It is further submitted that the custody of the child shall
remain with the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 shall have
visitation right as per schedule in the settlement. Copy of the
settlement deed dated 06.06.2025 has been annexed as Annexure-C.
5. Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been
identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating
Officer SI Ravi Malik, from PS Vasant Kunj South.
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 aforesaid settlement amount and has no objection if
the FIR No. 0005/2025 is quashed against the Petitioners. Petitioner
no. 1 undertakes to pay the remaining settlement amount of Rs.
10,00,000/- at the time of second motion, i.e. 16.10.2025.
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. 0005/2025 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.
0005/2025, dated 04.01.2025, registered at P.S Vasant Kunj, Delhi
under section 498A/406/34 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
September 15, 2025
SK
