Allowed¶36

Mahesh and Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC4 Aug 2025CRL.M.C./2277/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR on matrimonial settlement; Section 528 BNSS / Section 482 CrPC inherent powers; Sections 498A/406/34 IPC; FIR No. 319/2019 PS Uttam Nagar dated 28.05.2019; settlement dated 04.09.2024; Rs. 8,00,000/- full and final settlement; voluntary compromise; no-objection affidavit; relied on State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688 and Ramgopal v. State of M.P. (2021 INSC 568); CRL.M.C. 2277/2025; Delhi High Court; Justice Ajay Digpaul; order dated 04.08.2025.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 319/2019, dated 28.05.2019, registered at PS Uttam Nagar, Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, together with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom; pending application(s), if any, disposed of. ¶36

Mahesh and Ors. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 319/2019 dated 28.05.2019, PS Uttam Nagar (Sections 498A/406/34 IPC) and consequential proceedings may be quashed under Section 528 BNSS on the basis of the settlement agreement dated 04.09.2024. +1 more

¶24

Court's answer

The Court found that the criminal proceedings, though involving non-compoundable offences, were private in nature and did not have a serious impact on society, especially in view of the settlement/compromise between the victim and the accused.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

The Court found that respondent no. 2, present in Court, had entered into the compromise and settled the entire disputes amicably with the petitioners of her own free will, without any pressure or coercion; there was no allegation of bad conduct by the petitioners after the compromise, she had received the entire settled amount, and her affidavit of no objection to quashing was on record.

¶33

Key takeaways

In view of the settlement between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petition was allowed: FIR No. 319/2019 dated 28.05.2019 registered at PS Uttam Nagar, Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, stand quashed.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (AJAY DIGPAUL, J.; Order dated 04.08.2025 in CRL.M.C. 2277/2025) allowed a petition under Section 528 BNSS (earlier Section 482 CrPC) and quashed FIR No. 319/2019 dated 28.05.2019, PS Uttam Nagar, Delhi, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, together with all consequential proceedings. The FIR arose out of a matrimonial dispute (marriage 20.02.2018; separation since 27.07.2018); the parties settled on 04.09.2024, petitioner no. 1 agreeing to pay Rs. 8,00,000/- as full and final settlement (maintenance past/present/future, permanent alimony, stridhan, execution amount), of which Rs. 2,50,000/- remained payable at quashing; two cheques (Rs. 1,50,000/- and Rs. 1,00,000/-) were handed over in Court. Respondent no. 2, present and identified, confirmed the compromise was of her own free will without pressure, had received the entire settled amount, filed a no-objection affidavit, and the State raised no objection. Relying on State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688 and Ramgopal and Ors. vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 INSC 568, the Court held such non-compoundable, private-in-nature matrimonial proceedings may be quashed upon genuine voluntary settlement. Petition and pending application(s) disposed of.

¶1

$~70

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 2277/2025 & CRL.M.A. 10206/2025

¶4

MAHESH AND ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Vinod Kumar Jha, Adv. alongwith Petitioner no. 1

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP for State with SI Bharat Singh, PS Uttam Nagar and ASI Parveen Spl Branch, South West Zone R-2 in person

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 04.08.2025

¶11

1. The instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter “BNSS”) [earlier Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter “CrPC”)] has been filed on behalf of the petitioners praying for quashing of FIR No. 319/2019, dated 28.05.2019, registered at Police Station Uttam Nagar, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”).

¶12

2. The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 got solemnized on 20.02.2018 at Uttam Nagar, Delhi, in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies. However, due to some temperamental differences between them, shortly after their marriage, since 27.07.2018, they have been living separately. Petitioner no. 2 and 5 are the

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 12/08/2025 at 12:34:57

¶15

father-in-law and mother-in-law, respectively, of the respondent no. 2 and petitioners no. 3 & 4 are sister and brother of petitioner no. 1.

¶16

3. Despite several efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle their differences pursuant to which respondent no. 2 filed a criminal complaint against the petitioners which was converted into FIR no. 0319/2019.

¶17

4. With the intervention of family members and relatives, both the parties have entered into a settlement on 04.09.2024. The terms and conditions of the said settlement are mentioned in the Memorandum of Understanding which is annexed as Annexure B to the petition.

¶18

5. Further, in terms of the said settlement, it has been agreed among the parties that the petitioner no. 1 shall pay a total sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- to the respondent no. 2 as full and final settlement against all her claims including maintenance (past, present and future), permanent alimony, stridhan , including the execution amount.

¶19

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that respondent no. 2 has settled all her claims in respect of her dowry articles, stridhan , marriage expenses, jewelries, gift items and claims of past, present and future maintenance and permanent alimony with the petitioners for a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- and all disputes of any nature whatsoever, out of which the remaining amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- was agreed to be paid at the time of quashing of the FIR.

¶20

7. At this juncture, petitioner no. 1 has handed over two cheques bearing no. 744483 and 744486, dated 01.08.2025 and 02.08.2025, respectively, drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank for the amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- and Rs. 1,00,000/-, respectively, in the name of respondent no. 2 today in the Court.

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

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 12/08/2025 at 12:34:57

¶23

The respondent no. 2 has verified the particulars of the Demand Draft to her satisfaction and stated them to be correct. The copy of the said Demand Draft is handed over by the learned counsel appearing on behalf petitioners during the course of the arguments, which is taken on record.

¶24

8. It is, thus, prayed that the instant FIR be quashed on the basis of settlement agreement dated 04.09.2024. 9. Learned APP for the State submitted that there is no opposition to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 10. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 11. The petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel and the Investigating Officer, PS Uttam Nagar, Delhi. Respondent no. 2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel and the Investigating Officer.

¶25

12. On the query made by this Court, respondent no. 2 has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise on her own free will and without any pressure. It is also stated by respondent no. 2 that the entire dispute has been amicably settled between the parties. Parties also undertook that they shall abide by all the terms and conditions of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶26

13. The instant criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on the society especially when there is a settlement/compromise between victim and accused.

¶27

14. In such cases, it is settled law that High Court is also required to consider the conduct and antecedents of the accused in order to ascertain

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

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 12/08/2025 at 12:34:57

¶30

that the settlement has been entered into by her own free will and has not been imposed upon her by the petitioners or any person related to them.

¶31

15. In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and Ors. , (2019) 5 SCC 688 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the powers conferred under Section 482 of the CrPC/Section 528 of the BNSS, can be exercised by the Courts to quash the criminal proceedings featuring noncompoundable offences, when the matter arises out of matrimonial or family disputes. Moreover, it is pertinent to satisfy the Court that the said noncompoundable offences are private in nature and does not have a serious impact on the society.

¶32

16. Furthermore, it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramgopal and Ors. Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh , 2021 INSC 568 , that the extraordinary power enjoined upon the High Courts under Section 482 of the CrPC/Section 528 of the BNSS can be invoked even when such a case falls within the ambit of non-compoundable offences given that the Court must be satisfied that the nature of the offence does not impact the conscious of the society and that the compromise between the parties is voluntary and amicable.

¶33

17. In the present case, the complainant/respondent no. 2 is present in Court and has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise and settled the entire disputes amicably with the petitioners by her own free will without any pressure or coercion. There is also no allegation from respondent no. 2 that the conduct and antecedents of petitioners have been bad towards her after the compromise. As per the settlement, the respondent no. 2 has received the entire settled amount. Further, her affidavit, stating no objection to the instant FIR being quashed, is also on record.

¶34

This is a digitally signed order.

¶35

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 12/08/2025 at 12:34:57

¶36

18. Therefore, in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the present petition is allowed. Accordingly, FIR No. 319/2019, dated 28.05.2019, registered at PS Uttam Nagar, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

¶37

19. The petition along-with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶38

AJAY DIGPAUL, J

¶39

AUGUST 4, 2025 /AS/yr

¶40

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 12/08/2025 at 12:34:57

Mahesh and Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh and Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT 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

Vikas Alias Bhim Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Apoorv Shrivastava and Ors. Vs Gnct of Delhi & Anr.

Mohd Asif and Ors. Vs the State (N.C.T of Delhi) and Anr.

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

Ranvir Singh Yadav & Ors. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Scholar Alley Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs State (Govt of NCT Delhi) and Anr.