Matrimonial dispute settled via MoU with payment of Rs. 12 lakh and mutual-consent divorce; wife and State raised no objection. Court relied on Gian Singh and quashed FIR under Sections 498A/354A/406/34 IPC.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~31
RAHUL & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Dalip Kumar Santoshi, Adv. Alongwith petitioner in person.
versus
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel, (Crl.), Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advs. ASI, Ramavtar, PS Ambedkar Nagar. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Adv. for R-2. Along with R-2 and her brother in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
CRL.M.A. 10024/2025
W.P.(CRL) 1049/2025
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 00:59:45
no.2/wife was solemnized on 16.02.2021 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies and no child was born out of the said wedlock.
“Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Ld. Counsel for Respondent no. 2 & Respondent no. 2 appeared through VC and submits that the demand draft for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- bearing no. 804416 drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank, dated 03.02.2025 today handed over to Respondent no. 2 on the last date of hearing stands duly honoured and nothing else remains due in this case and Respondent no. 2 has no objection if FIR No. 634/2022, Under Section 498A/406/34/354-A IPC, registered PS Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi and all proceeding emanating there from is quashed qua the petitioners.
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 00:59:45
The statement of Respondent no. 2 to ascertain the veracity and the genuineness of the parties entering into settlement was recorded on 02.04.2025.
The compromise/MOU/Settlement dated 15.10.2024 entered into between the parties is on record as Annexure 2 at page no. 42.
As per the settlement, the respondent no. 2 has now received the total settlement amount towards her article, stridhan as well as towards alimony and maintenance past, present and future whatsoever and Respondent no. 2 shall not claim anything in this regards in future by way of any litigation.
Respondent no. 2 states that she has no objection whatsoever if FIR no. 634/2022, Under Section 498-A/406/34/354-A IPC, registered PS Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi against the petitioners is quashed.
Respondent no. 2 has also been granted divorce by Mutual consent in HMA No. 100/2025 vide decree dated 20.01.2025 which is on record as Annexure 3 at page 51.
There is no child born out the wedlock.
Respondent no. 2 shall abide by all the terms of the settlement and fully cooperate in quashing of the present FIR and withdrawal of any other case, if any as per the settlement. Respondent no. 2 undertakes to fully cooperate in quashing of the present FIR and withdrawal of all/any other connected case, if any. Respondent no. 2 has also given her affidavit in support of the present petition which is at page no. 31-32 of the petition bearing her signatures.
This pre verified report along with the petition may be placed before the Hon’ble Court on 13th May, 2025 alongwith the statements recorded today.”
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 00:59:45
“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 proceeding.”
MAY 13, 2025 / kr
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 00:59:45
1 issue framed by the court
Whether FIR No. 634/2022 under Sections 498A/354A/406/34 IPC should be quashed following settlement between the parties.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabRelied on¶12
(2012) 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Rahul & Ors.
The State of NCT of Delhi
Respondent No. 2 (complainant/wife)
Amit Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
