Dharmender & Ors. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

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. 202/2024, dated 02.04.2024, registered at P.S Swaroop Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶15

W.P.(CRL)3067/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶16

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 28.02.2020 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies. One girl 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 16.09.2023.

¶17

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. 202/2024 was lodged at instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Swaroop Nagar under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners. It has been submitted that Petitioner no. 2 has since expired on 22.08.2025. IO has confirmed the factum of death. Name of petitioner no. 2 is therefore deleted from the array of parties.

¶18

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes before the Counseling Cell, North District, Rohini Courts, New Delhi and the terms of the compromise were reduced into writing in the form of a Settlement dated 15.10.2024. In view of the aforesaid settlement, petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce on 17.03.2025. It is further submitted that petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees SevenLacs only) to respondent no. 2 as per the schedule in the settlement. It is further submitted that the custody of the child is with

¶19

W.P.(CRL)3067/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶20

respondent no. 2 with no visitation rights to petitioner no. 1. Copy of the Settlement dated 15.10.2024 has been annexed as Annexure B.

¶21

Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Kushank, from PS Swaroop Nagar.

¶22

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 and has no objection if the FIR No. 202/2024 is quashed against the Petitioners.

¶23

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 202/2024 is quashed.

¶24

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 303 .

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.(CRL)3067/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶27

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 .

¶28

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.

¶29

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 202/2024, dated 02.04.2024, registered at P.S Swaroop Nagar, Delhi under section 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

¶30

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶31

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

¶32

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

¶33

September 19, 2025 SK

¶34

W.P.(CRL)3067/2025 Page 4 of 4

Dharmender & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmender & 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

Pawan Gupta & Anr. Vs the State of Delhi NCT & Anr.

Rahul Kumar Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Bibek Singh Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Ravi Aggarwal Vs State ( NCT of Delhi ) & Anr.

Pheroze Framroze and Co. Limited Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Prem Alias Prem Singh Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Sh Aruna Alias Arun Kumar Pradhan Vs Union of India and Anr.

Mr. Anil Kotnala Vs Mrs. Kusum Kotnala

Anil D Kaneria Vs Orient Bell Limited & Anr.

Vipin Vs the State (Govt. of NCT Delhi)

Shabban Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Shanti Devi Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Himanshu Mittal Vs Regional Passport Office Delhi & Anr.