Disposed¶26

Ravi Kumar & Ors. v. the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Delhi HC6 May 2025CRL.M.C./492/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR; Sections 498A/406/34 IPC; matrimonial dispute; amicable settlement; Settlement Agreement dated 20.11.2023; compromise out of free will, no pressure, coercion or threat; statements before Joint Registrar (Judicial) dated 16.04.2025; FIR No. 604/2019, P.S. Nangloi, Delhi; CRL.M.C. 492/2025; High Court of Delhi; Dr. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma; decided 06.05.2025; custody of minor child with mother/respondent no. 2; no visitation rights to father; rights of child not settled in the order; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

FIR bearing no. 604/2019 registered at Police Station Nangloi, Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, quashed; petition disposed of. ¶26

Ravi Kumar & Ors. Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR bearing no. 604/2019 registered at Police Station Nangloi, Delhi, for offences under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, and the proceedings pursuant thereto, should be quashed in view of the amicable settlement between the parties.

¶12

Court's answer

Since the parties had amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, without any coercion, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings; rather, continuation would create further acrimony between them.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

It would be in the interest of justice to quash the FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto, and there was no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Matrimonial dispute / quashing of FIR — Petition under CRL.M.C. 492/2025 sought quashing of FIR No. 604/2019, Police Station Nangloi, Delhi, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, arising from the marriage of petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 solemnized on 13.11.2017, a daughter born on 25.10.2018, and separation of respondent no. 2 since 12.01.2019. The parties amicably settled their dispute vide Settlement Agreement dated 20.11.2023, with statements recorded by the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 16.04.2025. Respondent no. 2 confirmed before the Court that the compromise was entered out of her own free will, without pressure, coercion or threat, and that she had no objection to quashing. Holding that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings, that continuation would create further acrimony, and that quashing was in the interest of justice with no legal impediment, Dr. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom and disposed of the petition (order dated 06.05.2025). Counsel for the petitioners stated that custody of the minor child would remain with the mother/respondent no. 2 with no visitation rights to the father, and that the rights of the child had not been settled in the order and were not mentioned in the petition.

¶1

$~70

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 492/2025 & CRL.M.A. 2329/2025

¶4

RAVI KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Mr. Rahul Singh and Mr. Narender Kumar, Advocates along with petitioners.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rajkumar, APP for the State with IO, P.S. Nangloi.

¶8

Mr. Dinesh Singhal, Mr. Ashwani Kumar and Mr. Naveen Kumar, Advocates for R-2 along with R-2.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 06.05.2025

¶12

By way of present petition, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR bearing no. 604/2019, registered at Police Station Nangloi, Delhi, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter ‘IPC’ ).

¶13

The petitioners and respondent no. 2 have appeared before this Court. They have been identified by their counsels and concerned Investigating Officer (IO), from Police Station Nangloi, Delhi.

¶14

Brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 2 was solemnized at Delhi on 13.11.2017, in

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 09/05/2025 at 14:24:10

¶17

accordance with Hindu rites. One daughter was born out of the said wedlock on 25.10.2018. It is stated that due to various differences, disputes and issues had arisen between the petitioners and the respondent no. 2. It is stated that respondent no. 2 had started living separately since 12.01.2019. Upon the complaint by respondent no. 2, the present FIR came to be registered against the petitioners. It is stated that with intervention of the family and friends, the parties have now amicably settled their dispute vide Settlement Agreement dated 20.11.2023.

¶18

It is stated that both the parties have amicably settled the present matter vide Settlement Agreement dated 20.11.2023, entered between them and their statements to the said effect have been recorded by the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 16.04.2025.

¶19

On a query made by this Court, respondent no.2 who has been identified by the concerned IO, has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise out of her own free will and without any pressure, coercion or threat. It is also stated by respondent no. 2 that the entire dispute has been amicably settled between the parties. Respondent no. 2 further states that she has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

¶20

The learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) has recorded statements of the parties. The parties are present before this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the custody of the minor child will remain with the mother/respondent no.2 and the petitioner father herein, has no visitation rights. The petitioner/father is also present who states that he understands that he has no visitation rights.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioners also states that the rights of the child have not been settled in this order and therefore, the same are not

¶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 09/05/2025 at 14:24:10

¶24

mentioned in the petition.

¶25

In view of the above fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served by continuing the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them. It would thus be in interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

¶26

Accordingly, FIR bearing no. 604/2019, registered at Police Station Nangloi, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

¶27

In view of the above, the present petition stands disposed of.

¶28

The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.

¶29

DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J

¶30

MAY 6, 2025/zp

¶31

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶32

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 09/05/2025 at 14:24:10

¶33

This is a digitally signed order.

Ravi Kumar & Ors. v. the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Kumar & Ors. v. the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepinder Singh Vs Ecl Finance Limited and Ors.

Ms Xxx Vs State and Anr. & Anr.

Taslim Vs State Govt. of NCT of Del Hi

Sh. Akshay Tandon Vs Smt. Ruchika Tandon @ Rachna & Ors.

Sanjay Dandona Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi Nd Anr.

Mohd Shokeen Vs State of NCT Delhi