Mohd. Sahil and Others Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Adv. with SI Sachin, PS Khajuri Khas. Mr. Chandrakar Mishra, Adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person.

¶10

CORAM:HO�'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI�DER DUDEJA

¶11

JUDGME�T(ORAL)

¶12

RAVI�DER DUDEJA, J.

¶13

This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 232/2024, dated 04.04.2024, registered at P.S Khajuri Khas, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶14

W.P.(CRL). 3958/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶15

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 6.12.2025 16:28:47

¶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 19.02.2023 as per Muslim Rites and ceremonies. No 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 14.05.2023.

¶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. 232/2024 was lodged at the instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Khajuri Khas under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners.

¶18

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes and the terms of settlement were written in the form of Mubarat Deed dated 16.07.2025. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce on 29.07.2025 and the petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 7,00,000/(Rupees Seven Lacs only) and returned the jewellery articles to respondent no. 2 as per the schedule in the settlement. Copy of the settlement agreement dated 16.07.2025 has been annexed as Annexure P-2.

¶19

Petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and respondent no. 2 are physically present before the Court while petitioner nos. 4, 5, 6 & 7 have entered their appearance through VC. They have been identified by their

¶20

W.P.(CRL). 3958/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶21

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 6.12.2025 16:28:47

¶22

respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Sachin, from PS Khajuri Khas.

¶23

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 and has no objection if the FIR No. 232/2024 is quashed against the Petitioners.

¶24

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 232/2024 is quashed.

¶25

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 .

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.(CRL). 3958/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶28

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 6.12.2025 16:28:47

¶29

if the parties have reached an amicable settlement. Reliance may be placed upon B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC .

¶30

In view of the above facts that the parties have amicably resolved their differences out of their own free will and without any coercion, it would be in the interest of justice, to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶31

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 232/2024, dated 04.04.2024, registered at P.S Khajuri Khas, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

¶32

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶33

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

¶34

RAVI�DER DUDEJA, J

¶35

DECEMBER 06, 2025 MA

¶36

W.P.(CRL). 3958/2025 Page 4 of 4

¶37

Signature Not Verified

¶38

Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 6.12.2025 16:28:47

Mohd. Sahil and Others v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Sahil and Others v. State 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

Saroj Bala Malik & Anr. Vs State (N.C.T of Delhi) and Ors.

Dr Sushil Kumar Sayal Vs the State through SHO & Anr.

Sahdev Singh Gahlan & Ors. Vs State of N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr.

Prince Aggarwal & Ors. Vs the State Govt NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Sh Ravi Kumar Wadhwan @Nanhe Vs State of Govt of NCT of Delhi through SHO

Jamil Ahmed Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Jyothimon Dethan Vs Union of India and Ors.

Saurabh Sharma Vs State (Gnct of Delhi)

Varun Kwatra Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.

Neeraj Agrawal Vs Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Kshitij Raghav & Ors. Vs the State N.Ct of Delhi and Anr.

Nikhil Lahri Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Raj Dhameja & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.