Delhi High Court
Dhruv Rai Sahore & Ors vs State Of Gnct Of Delhi & Anr on 25 September, 2025
$~100
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 25.09.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ W.P.(CRL) 1400/2025 & CRL.M.A. 13034/2025 EXEMPTION
DHRUV RAI SAHORE & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Dev Rishi, Advocate.
Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 in
person.
Petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 through
VC.
versus
STATE OF GNCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing
Counsel with SI Lal Bahadur,
PS-Malviya Nagar.
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 the Constitution of India
read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
seeking quashing of FIR No. 572/2023, dated 02.11.2023, registered at
P.S Malviya Nagar, 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 09.03.2021 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies at
Uttar Pradesh. No 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 11.07.2022.
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. 572/2023 was lodged at instance
of Respondent no. 2 under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the
petitioners.
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
03.11.2024. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2
have obtained divorce on 04.02.2025 and petitioner no. 1 has paid the
entire settlement amount of Rs. 17,00,000/- (Rupees Seventeen Lacs
only) & returned all the articles stated in the settlement to respondent
no. 2 as per the schedule in the settlement. Copy of the Memorandum
of Understanding dated 03.11.2024 has been annexed as Annexure P-
5. Petitioners no 1 & 2 and respondent no. 2 are physically present
before the Court while petitioner no. 3 to 5 have entered their
appearance through VC. They have been identified by their respective
counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Lal Bahadur, from
PS Malviya Nagar.
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 along all articles stated in
the settlement and has no objection if the FIR No. 572/2023 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. 572/2023 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.
572/2023, dated 02.11.2023, registered at P.S Malviya Nagar, 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 25, 2025
SK
