Allowed

Shohrab @ Sohrab and Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC19 May 2025CRL.M.C./267/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition for quashing a domestic violence and cruelty FIR was allowed. The court held that a genuine post-FIR settlement between the husband and wife, verified by the Joint Registrar and Public Prosecutor, warranted quashing the FIR and consequential proceedings in the interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 1195/2023 and all consequential proceedings, including the chargesheet, have been quashed.

Shohrab @ Sohrab and Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~81

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 267/2025

¶4

SHOHRAB @ SOHRAB AND ORS .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Roshan Lal, Adv. (through VC). Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv. with petitioners in person.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP for the State. SI Ankur, P.S. Sultanpuri. Respondent no.2 in person.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 19.05.2025

¶12

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶13

CRL.M.A. 1360/2025 (Exemption)

¶14

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.

¶15

CRL.M.C. 267/2025

¶16

The present petition under Section 528 of the BNSS (Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.) seeks quashing of FIR No. 1195/2023 under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Sultanpuri and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Preeti Rajoria, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, North-West, Rohini Courts, Delhi.

¶17

The marriage between the petitioner no.1/husband and the respondent no.2/wife was solemnized in 2015 as per Muslim Rites and Customs and two

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

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 22/05/2025 at 12:12:57

¶20

children were born out of the said wedlock.

¶21

Due to matrimonial differences between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, the parties resided separately from 12.11.2023. Subsequently, respondent no.2/complainant lodged an FIR against petitioner no. 1 (husband), petitioner no. 2 (mother-in-law) and petitioner no. 3 (father-inlaw) and petitioner no.4 (brother-in-law)

¶22

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the proceedings, the latter has settled the matter with respondent no. 2 vide Memorandum of Understanding dated 13.12.2024 and in pursuance of which respondent no. 2 has no objection, if the present FIR and the subsequent chargesheet are quashed. Complainant who is present in Court states that they have been residing together since 13.12.2024.

¶23

Petitioners and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer SI Ankur, P.S. Sultanpuri.

¶24

The matter was also placed before the learned Joint Registrar who has recorded the statements of both the parties and passed the following order dated 25.04.2025:

¶25

“1. The present non contentious petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of the FIR NO. 1195/2023 Under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at P.S. Sultanpuri on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶26

As per the submissions, the matter between the petitioners and R-2 has been amicably settled.

¶27

Vide separate statement recorded in this behalf, petitioners stated that dispute between them and R-2 has been amicably settled as per the settlement deed dated 13.12.2024. The settlement has been arrived at between the parties herein without any force, coercion, undue influence and pressure. They have signed the settlement deed with their wish and

¶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 22/05/2025 at 12:12:57

¶30

will. Vide separate statement recorded in this behalf, R-2 stated that dispute between R-2 and petitioners has been amicably settled as per the settlement deed dated 13.12.2024. The settlement has been arrived at between the parties herein without any force, coercion, undue influence and pressure. The settlement deed has been signed with wish and will.

¶31

Investigating Officer is present in Court and has duly verified the identity of both the parties. Separate statement of Investigating Officer has also been recorded.

¶32

The parties along with their counsels have confirmed that the settlement deed has been duly entered into between them.

¶33

Learned counsel for State/APP enters appearance and accepts notice. He submits that in view of the statement recorded, let the matter be placed before the Hon'ble Court.

¶34

The compromise/settlement deed is in writing and has been duly signed by both the parties. I have heard both the parties and from the direct dialogue with both the parties, it is observed that the consent of both the parties is found to be genuine and has not been obtained under undue influence or pressure.

¶35

In view of the above, matter be placed before the Hon'ble Court on 19.05.2025”.

¶36

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned APP for the State also has no objection if the present FIR and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the chargesheet are quashed.

¶37

In Gian Singh vs. 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:-

¶38

“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.”

¶39

This is a digitally signed order.

¶40

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 22/05/2025 at 12:12:57

¶41

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. 1195/2023 under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Sultanpuri and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Preeti Rajoria, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, North-West, Rohini Courts, Delhi.

¶42

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 1195/2023 under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Sultanpuri and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Preeti Rajoria, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, North-West, Rohini Courts, Delhi are hereby quashed

¶43

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶44

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

¶45

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶46

MAY 19, 2025 / nk/pr

¶47

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶48

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 22/05/2025 at 12:12:57

¶49

This is a digitally signed order.

Shohrab @ Sohrab and Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shohrab @ Sohrab and Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satish and Anr. Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Gurdial Singh Vs State of N.C.T of Delhi

Bhag Singh @ Bobby Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

A (Prosecutrix) Vs State and Anr.

Deepak Alias Chintu Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Abc Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.