Prashant@Prashant Gulla and Ors. Vs the State N.C.T. of Delhi and Anr.

¶1

$~61

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 4001/2025 & CRL.M.A. 35962/2025

¶4

PRASHANT@PRASHANT GULLA AND ORS .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Pardeep Vijayran, Mr. Nalin Kaushik, Mr. Humender Singh and Mr. Virat Balhara, Advs. along with petitioners

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhinav Arya for Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel for State with ASI Gangadhar, PS NIA Mr. Rajesh Tanwar, Adv. for R-2 along with R-2

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 03.12.2025

¶12

1. The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (earlier Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) has been filed on behalf of the petitioners praying for the quashing of FIR No. 277/2025, registered at Police Station Narela Industrial Area, for offences punishable under Sections 85/316(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter “BNS”).

¶13

2. The brief facts concerning the present dispute are that the marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 was solemnized on 23.06.2023, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. However, due to some temperamental differences between them, shortly after their marriage, they started living separately.

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 09/12/2025 at 12:17:54

¶16

3. Despite efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle their differences, pursuant to which respondent no. 2 got FIR No. 277/2025 registered.

¶17

4. However, at this stage, with the intervention of family members and relatives, both the parties have entered a settlement on 19.08.2025. The terms and conditions of the said settlement are mentioned in the Settlement Deed which is annexed as “Annexure-B” 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 09.10.2025 was passed by the Court concerned.

¶18

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 ₹19,00,000/-, out of which a remaining amount of ₹6,50,000/- was agreed to be paid at the time of quashing of the FIR.

¶19

6. At this juncture, petitioner no.1 has handed over a Demand Draft bearing No. 565910 dated 02.12.2025 for the balance amount of ₹6,50,000/in the name of respondent no. 2 today in the Court. Respondent no. 2 has verified the particulars of the Demand Draft to her satisfaction and stated them to be correct.

¶20

7. It is, thus, prayed that the instant FIR be quashed on the basis of Settlement Deed dated 19.08.2025.

¶21

8. Learned counsel for the State, who appears on advance notice, accepts

¶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 09/12/2025 at 12:17:54

¶24

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.

¶25

9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. The petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel and the Investigating Officer, Police Station Narela Industrial Area. Respondent no. 2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel and the concerned Investigating Officer.

¶26

11. 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.

¶27

12. 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. 13. 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.

¶28

14. 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

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 09/12/2025 at 12:17:54

¶31

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.

¶32

15. 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 Compromise Deed, respondent no. 2 has received the entire settled amount. Further, she submits that she has no objection to the present FIR being quashed.

¶33

16. 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.277/2025, registered at Police Station Narela Industrial Area, for offences punishable under Sections 85/316(2)/3(5) of the BNS, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed qua the present petitioners.

¶34

17. Children from the wedlock, if any, are free to assert their rights in accordance with law.

¶35

18. The petition, along-with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶36

AJAY DIGPAUL, J

¶37

DECEMBER 3, 2025 /ar/ yr

¶38

This is a digitally signed order.

¶39

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 09/12/2025 at 12:17:54

Prashant@Prashant Gulla and Ors. v. the State N.C.T. of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant@Prashant Gulla and Ors. v. the State N.C.T. 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

Kamal Pathak & Ors. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Kamla Devi Dalal & Anr. Vs Jyoti Malik

Tripti Chauhan Vs the State of NCT Delhi & Anr.

Venkateshwar Hospital and Anr. Vs State of NCT Delhi and Anr.

Ashok & Ors. Vs the State Govt of N.C.T of Delhi & Anr.

Rahul & Anr. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Surender Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Aniket Dey Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Hemant Vs State NCT of Delhi through SHO Ps Rajouri Garden

Mehfuz Ali and Others Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Yogesh and Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Sushila Devi Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Vicky @ Vikky Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.