Shri Rahul Kumar & Ors. Vs the State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

¶1

$~80

¶2

*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**

¶3

% Date of decision: 08.10.2025

¶4

W.P.(CRL) 3286/2025

¶5

SHRI RAHUL KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Hitik Bansal, Mr. Kumar Ankit, Advs. with all petitioners in person.

¶7

versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhinav Arya, Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advs. with SI Rupesh Raj, PS Subhash Place & SI Jitender, DIV/NW.

¶8

Mr. Hari Shankar Bhardwaj, Adv for R-2 with R-2 in person

¶9

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA JUDGMENT(ORAL)

¶10

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

¶11

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. 867/2022, dated 05.08.2022, registered at P.S Subhash Place, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all

¶12

W.P.(CRL)3286/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶13

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 8.10.2025 18:11:35

¶14

proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶15

The factual matrix giving rise to the instant case is that the marriage between Petitioner No. 1and Respondent no. 2/complainant was solemnized on 05.12.2020 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies at New Delhi. One 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 21.06.2021.

¶16

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. Chargesheet has since been filed under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners.

¶17

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes and the terms of settlement were written in the form of a Memorandum of Understanding dated 20.03.2024. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce on 07.09.2024 and the custody of the child shall be with respondent no. 2. Copy of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 20.03.2024 has been annexed.

¶18

Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Rupesh Raj, from PS Subhash Place and SI Jitender, DIV/NW.

¶19

W.P.(CRL)3286/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶20

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 8.10.2025 18:11:35

¶21

Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners without any force, fear, coercion and she has no objection if the FIR No. 867/2022 is quashed against the Petitioners.

¶22

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 867/2022 is quashed.

¶23

Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicablesettlement 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 .

¶24

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 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 .

¶25

W.P.(CRL)3286/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶26

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 8.10.2025 18:11:35

¶27

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.

¶28

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 867/2022, dated 05.08.2022, registered at P.S Subhash Place, Delhi under section 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

¶29

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶30

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

¶31

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

¶32

October 08, 2025 SK

¶33

W.P.(CRL)3286/2025 Page 4 of 4

¶34

Signature Not Verified

¶35

Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 8.10.2025 18:11:35

Shri Rahul Kumar & Ors. v. the State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Rahul Kumar & Ors. v. the State (Nct of Delhi) & 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

Vaseem & Anr. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Gautam Kher Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Mrs Xx Vs the State NCT Delhi & Anr.

Raj Kumar Vs State NCT of Delhi

Nargis Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Rajni and Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rakesh Kumar Alias Raka Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Save Earth Stone Vs State (N.C.T. of Delhi)

Pinki Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Ayush Bhedda Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Mandeep Singh & Ors. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Neeraj Katar & Anr. Vs the Commissioner of Police & Ors.

S. and Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.