Allowed¶31

Rahul Saini & Ors. v. State of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC18 Dec 2025CRL.M.C./3906/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR; Section 528 BNSS petition; Sections 498A/406/34 IPC; non-compoundable offences; matrimonial dispute; settlement deed dated 19.02.2024; Delhi Mediation Centre Rohini; voluntary compromise of complainant; divorce decree 07.12.2024 under Section 13B Hindu Marriage Act; reliance on Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688 and Ramgopal (2021 INSC 568); FIR No. 234/2023 PS North Rohini; CRL.M.C. 3906/2025; Justice Ajay Digpaul; decided 18.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 234/2023 registered at Police Station North Rohini for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, qua the present petitioners; petition along with pending application(s), if any, disposed of. ¶31

Rahul Saini & Ors. Vs State of Delhi & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 234/2023 (Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, PS North Rohini) and all consequential proceedings can be quashed on the basis of the Settlement Deed dated 19.02.2024, notwithstanding that the offences are non-compoundable. +1 more

¶18

Court's answer

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petition is allowed and FIR No. 234/2023 (Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, PS North Rohini) and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed qua the present petitioners.

¶31

Ratio / Principle

The Court found that respondent no. 2 entered into the compromise and settled the entirety of disputes with the petitioners amicably and of her own free will, without any pressure or coercion; she had received the entire settled amount under the Settlement Deed and had no objection to the FIR being quashed.

¶30

Key takeaways

Children from the wedlock, if any, are free to assert their rights in accordance with law; the quashing does not extinguish their rights.obiter¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Ajay Digpaul, J.) allowed a petition under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of FIR No. 234/2023, Police Station North Rohini (Sections 498A/406/34 IPC), arising out of a matrimonial dispute. The parties had settled all disputes on 19.02.2024 before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini Courts for a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- and had obtained a divorce decree dated 07.12.2024 under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Relying on State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, and Ramgopal and Ors. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 INSC 568, the Court held that quashing power may be exercised for non-compoundable, private offences arising from matrimonial/family disputes where the compromise is voluntary. Recording that the complainant (respondent no. 2) appeared in Court, confirmed the settlement was amicable, of her own free will and without coercion, that she had received the entire settled amount, and that she had no objection, the FIR and all consequential proceedings were quashed qua the petitioners; rights of children from the wedlock, if any, were left free to be asserted in accordance with law.

¶1

$~47

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 3906/2025 & CRL.M.A. 17053/2025

¶4

RAHUL SAINI & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. C.M.Gopal, Adv. along with petitioners

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP for State SI Bhanu, PS North Rohini Mr. Narendra Thakur, Adv. for R-2 (through VC) R-2 in person (through VC)

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 18.12.2025

¶11

1. The instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed on behalf of the petitioners praying for the quashing of FIR No. 234/2023, registered at Police Station North Rohini, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”).

¶12

2. The brief facts concerning the present dispute are that the marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 was solemnized on 01.12.2021, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. However, due to some temperamental differences between them, shortly after their marriage, they started living separately.

¶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 27/12/2025 at 12:03:44

¶15

3. Despite efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle their differences, pursuant to which respondent no. 2 got FIR No. 234/2023 registered.

¶16

4. However, at this stage, with the intervention of family members and relatives, both the parties have entered a settlement on 19.02.2024 before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini Courts, Delhi. The terms and conditions of the said settlement are mentioned in the Settlement Deed which is annexed as “Annexure P/3” to the petition. In pursuance of the said settlement, the parties have jointly agreed that they shall move for divorce under Section 13B (1) and under Section 13B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and accordingly, a divorce decree dated 07.12.2024 was passed by the Court concerned.

¶17

5. 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, jewelleries, gift items and claims of past, present and future maintenance and permanent alimony with the petitioners and all disputes of any nature whatsoever for a sum of ₹5,00,000/-.

¶18

6. It is, thus, prayed that the instant FIR be quashed on the basis of Settlement Deed dated 19.02.2024.

¶19

7. Learned APP for the State, who appears on advance notice, accepts notice and submits 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.

¶20

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶21

9. The petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel and the Investigating Officer, Police Station North Rohini.

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 27/12/2025 at 12:03:44

¶24

Respondent no. 2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by the counsel and the concerned Investigating Officer.

¶25

10. The instant criminal proceedings concern non-compoundable offences that are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, especially considering that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the accused.

¶26

11. 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 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. 12. In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. 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 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 do not have a serious impact on society.

¶27

13. Furthermore, it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramgopal and Ors. v. 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 is satisfied that the nature of the offence does not impact the conscience of society, and that the compromise between the parties is voluntary and amicable.

¶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 27/12/2025 at 12:03:44

¶30

14. 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 entirety of disputes with the petitioners amicably and of 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 entering into this compromise. As per the Settlement Deed, respondent no. 2 has received the entire settled amount. Further, she submits that she has no objection to the present FIR being quashed.

¶31

15. 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. 234/2023, registered at Police Station North Rohini, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed qua the present petitioners.

¶32

16. Children from the wedlock, if any, are free to assert their rights in accordance with law. 17. The petition, along with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶33

AJAY DIGPAUL, J

¶34

DECEMBER 18, 2025 / AS/yr

¶35

This is a digitally signed order.

¶36

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 27/12/2025 at 12:03:44

Rahul Saini & Ors. v. State of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Saini & Ors. v. State 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

Dr Sarvesh Kumar & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Mr Lalit Paswan Alias Panji Vs State NCT of Delhi

Sonu Sonkar Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Prashant Kumar Sharma Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr. & Anr. & Ors.

Siddarth Bhatnagar & Ors. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Yogesh Kumar Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Ors.