Allowed¶30

Tarun Sharma and Ors. v. the State Gnct of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC4 Jul 2025W.P.(CRL)/1807/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court 2025; W.P.(CRL) 1807/2025; quashing of FIR on settlement; matrimonial dispute; FIR No. 532/2024; P.S. Welcome; Sections 354B, 498A, 406, 506, 34 IPC; Sections 3 and 4 Dowry Prohibition Act 1961; Article 226 Constitution; Section 528 BNSS; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; settlement deed 05.10.2024 Family Court Shahdara; divorce decree 03.01.2025; Rs. 1,50,000 settlement; istridhan; permanent alimony and maintenance; complainant no objection; State no objection; chargesheet not filed; quietus; Amit Sharma J.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 532/2024 (P.S. Welcome) quashed; petition allowed and disposed of accordingly; pending application(s), if any, disposed of. ¶30

Tarun Sharma and Ors. Vs the State Gnct of Delhi and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

FIR No. 532/2024 (P.S. Welcome) quashed; petition allowed and disposed of accordingly; pending application(s), if any, disposed of.

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 532/2024, registered at P.S. Welcome under Sections 354B/498A/406/506/34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, should be quashed in view of the settlement between the parties, the divorce decree, and the absence of objection from the complainant and the State.

¶14

Court's answer

Since the parties had put a quietus to the dispute — settlement deed dated 05.10.2024, divorce decree dated 03.01.2025, the settlement amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- paid and acknowledged, respondent no.2's stated no-objection, and the State's no-objection despite investigation being pending and the chargesheet unfiled — no useful purpose would be served in continuing with FIR No. 532/2024.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

In the interest of justice, the petition was allowed and FIR No. 532/2024, under Sections 354B/498A/406/506/34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at P.S. Welcome, was quashed.

¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of FIR on matrimonial settlement — W.P.(CRL) 1807/2025 (Delhi High Court, Amit Sharma, J., 04.07.2025). Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 528 of the BNSS sought quashing of FIR No. 532/2024, P.S. Welcome, under Sections 354B/498A/406/506/34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, arising out of the marriage of petitioner no.1/husband and respondent no.2/wife solemnized on 22.04.2022. Parties separated from 23.03.2023 and settled on 05.10.2024 before the Family Court, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts (Rs. 1,50,000/- full and final, covering istridhan, permanent alimony and maintenance); the marriage stood dissolved by divorce decree dated 03.01.2025 and the settlement amount was paid and acknowledged. Respondent no.2 had no objection to quashing, and the State, though investigation was pending and chargesheet unfiled, also raised no objection. Holding that the parties had put a quietus to the dispute and no useful purpose would be served in continuing the FIR (relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303), the Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR.

¶1

$~53

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 1807/2025

¶4

TARUN SHARMA AND ORS .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Ms. Sakshi Arora, Mr. Sarthak Sharma, Mr. Hitesh Pandey, Ms. Divya Mangla, Advocates along with Petitioner no. 5 in person. Petitioners no. 1 to 4 through Vc.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE GNCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.) for the State with Ms. Priyam Agarwal, Mr. Abhinav Kumar and Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advocates. SI Tulsi, P.S. Welcome. Mr. Aasheesh Sharma, Advocate for R-2 along with R-2 in person.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 04.07.2025 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶12

CRL.M.A. 16907/2025 (exemption)

¶13

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. W.P.(CRL) 1807/2025

¶14

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the BNSS seeks quashing of the FIR No. 532/2024, under Sections 354B/498A/406/506/34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at P.S. Welcome.

¶15

The marriage between petitioner no.1/husband and respondent

¶16

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 09/07/2025 at 11:47:21

¶17

no.2/wife was solemnized on 22.04.2022 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies.

¶18

No child was born out of the said wedlock.

¶19

Due to matrimonial differences between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2, the parties started residing separately from 23.03.2023. Subsequently, respondent no.2/complainant lodged an FIR against the petitioners.

¶20

On 05.10.2024, parties have arrived at a settlement before the Family Court, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi and as per the said settlement deed, petitioner no.1 has agreed to pay an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the respondent no.2/wife towards full and final settlement of all her claims including istridhan , permanent alimony and maintenance - present, past and future.

¶21

In terms of the said settlement, the marriage between the parties stands dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 03.01.2025, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court (Shahdara), Karkardooma Courts. Further, as per the settlement deed, the settlement amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- has already been paid to respondent no.2 who acknowledges the receipt of the same.

¶22

Petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 appears through video conferencing, petitioner no. 5 and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel, as well as the Investigating Officer, SI Tulsi, P.S. Welcome.

¶23

The complainant/respondent No.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioners and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed. She further states that all the terms of the agreement have been complied with.

¶24

Learned Standing Counsel (Crl.) for the State submits that investigation in the present FIR is pending and chargesheet is yet to be filed, however, in view of the settlement between the parties, he has no objection if the present

¶25

¶26

FIR is quashed.

¶27

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under:-

¶28

“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.”

¶29

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, and the fact that the parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No. 532/2024, under Sections 354B/498A/406/506/34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at P.S. Welcome.

¶30

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 532/2024, under Sections 354B/498A/406/506/34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at P.S. Welcome, is hereby quashed.

¶31

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶32

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶33

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶34

JULY 4, 2025/bsr Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶35

Tarun Sharma and Ors. v. the State Gnct of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarun Sharma and Ors. v. the State Gnct of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chander Prakash Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Pawan Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Ravinder Rana Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Dushyant @ Sonu & Ors. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Sh Love Yadav @ Love Kumar Yadav @Love Kumar & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Dharmender Singh Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rithin Narayanan K Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Deepak Srivastav Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Lokender Singh Vs State through SHO Ps Ranhola

Dinesh Kumar Vs Subhash Singh

Asha Rani Gupta Vs Rudresh Pratap Singh

Mohit Vs State Govt NCT of Delhi

Sh. Shyam Bachwani & Anr. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Satendra Tiwari Vs Alok Kumar