Akshay Arya & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC13 Oct 2025CRL.M.C./5915/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court quashing FIR 498A 34 IPC matrimonial dispute compromise settlement MoU stridhan maintenance permanent alimony demand draft Section 482 CrPC Section 528 BNSS Laxmi Narayan 2019 5 SCC 688 Ramgopal 2021 INSC 568 non-compoundable offence private in nature free will coercion Palam Village FIR 0044/2024 divorce Section 13B Hindu Marriage Act decree CRL.M.C. 5915/2025 Ajay Digpaul 13.10.2025 Akshay Arya

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR no. 0044/2024 registered at Police Station – Palam Village for offences punishable under Sections 498A/34 IPC and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, qua the present petitioners; petition along with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of ¶¶33

Akshay Arya & Ors. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR no. 0044/2024 (Police Station Palam Village; Sections 498A/34 IPC) and all consequent criminal proceedings should be quashed pursuant to the settlement (MoU dated 04.01.2025) reached between the parties +1 more

¶¶20

Court's answer

This court characterised the instant proceedings as concerning 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

Ratio / Principle

In such cases, it is settled law that the 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.

¶¶27

Key takeaways

Respondent no. 2, present in Court, categorically confirmed that she entered into the compromise and settled the entirety of disputes with the petitioners amicably, of her own free will, without pressure or coercion; there was also no allegation of bad conduct or antecedents of the petitioners towards her after the compromise.ratio¶¶32
As per the Settlement Deed, respondent no. 2 has received the entire settled amount and submits that she has no objection to the present FIR being quashed.ratio¶¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRL.M.C. 5915/2025 (Delhi HC, Justice Ajay Digpaul, order dt. 13.10.2025): Petition under Section 482 CrPC by Akshay Arya & Ors. to quash FIR 0044/2024, PS Palam Village (Sections 498A/34 IPC). Matrimonial discord after marriage solemnized 27.06.2019 led respondent no. 2 to lodge the FIR; the parties subsequently settled vide MoU dt. 04.01.2025 (total Rs. 8,00,000, balance Rs. 2,00,000 paid in Court by DD No. 172183 dt. 10.10.2025) and obtained a divorce decree dt. 25.02.2025 under Section 13B HMA. Relying on State of MP v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688 and Ramgopal v. State of MP, 2021 INSC 568, the Court found the non-compoundable offences private in nature with no serious societal impact, satisfied itself that the compromise was voluntary, of respondent no. 2's own free will, and that the entire settled amount stood received, and quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings qua the petitioners; rights of children from the wedlock, if any, left free to be asserted.

¶1

$~33

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 5915/2025 & CRL.M.A. 25218/2025

¶4

AKSHAY ARYA & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Navin Kumar Thakur, Adv. (through VC) Petitioners in person

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for State with Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh, Adv. SI Rajesh and SI Arvind Kumar, PS Palam Village Mr. R.P. Kaushik and Mr. Himanshu Kaushik, Adv. for R-2 along with R-2

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 13.10.2025

¶12

1. The instant petition under Section Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter “CrPC”) has been filed on behalf of the petitioners praying for the quashing of FIR bearing no. 0044/2024, registered at Police Station – Palam Village, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”).

¶13

2. The brief facts concerning the present dispute are that the marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no.2 was solemnized on 27.06.2019, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. However, due to some temperamental differences between them, shortly after their marriage, they started living separately.

¶14

3. Despite efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle their differences, pursuant to which respondent no. 2 got FIR no. 0044/2024 registered.

¶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 25/10/2025 at 11:34:49

¶17

4. However, at this stage, with the intervention of family members and relatives, both the parties have entered a settlement on 04.01.2025 and a Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter “MoU”) was executed between the parties. The terms and conditions of the said settlement are mentioned in the MoU which is annexed as “Annexure P-4” 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 (hereinafter “HMA”) and accordingly, a divorce decree dated 25.02.2025 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 ₹ 8,00,000/-, out of which a remaining amount of ₹2,00,000/- 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. 172183 dated 10.10.2025 for the balance amount of ₹2,00,000/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 MoU dated 04.01.2025.

¶21

8. 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

¶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 25/10/2025 at 11:34:49

¶24

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 Palam Village. 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 vs. 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. vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh , 2021 INSC 568 , that the extraordinary power enjoined upon the High Courts under

¶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 25/10/2025 at 11:34:49

¶31

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 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.

¶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. 0044/2024, registered at Police Station – Palam Village, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/34 of the IPC, 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

OCTOBER 13, 2025 /ar/dd

¶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 25/10/2025 at 11:34:49

Akshay Arya & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshay Arya & Ors. v. State Govt. of 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

Sahil Yadav Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Vishal @ Lucky and Others Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Raju and Others Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Vipin Goel and Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Bhagwat Dayal & Anr. Vs the State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Ors.

Rajnath @ Dharmender Vs State NCT of Delhi