Puneet Dua & Ors. Vs State of NCT Delhi & Anr.

¶1

$~59

¶2

*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**

¶3

% Date of decision: 01.09.2025

¶4

CRL.M.C. 6089/2025 PUNEET DUA & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Adv. (appearance not given) Petitioners in person. versus

¶6

STATE OF NCT DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Aman Usman, APP for the State with SI Deepika, P.S.Vikas Puri and SI Shweta, P.S.Tilak Nagar. Ms. Poonam Rajesh, Adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶8

JUDGMENT(ORAL)

¶9

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

¶10

CRL.M.A. 25913/2025 EXEMPTION

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

The application stands disposed of.

¶13

CRL.M.C. 6089/2025 & CRL.M.A. 25912/2025 STAY

¶14

This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 405/2023, dated

¶15

CRL.M.C. 6089/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶16

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 1.09.2025 18:31:22

¶17

08.08.2023, registered at P.S Vikaspuri, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶18

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 24.03.2010 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies. No child was born out of the said wedlock. However, on account of temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1and Respondent No. 2 are living separately since 04.09.2022.

¶19

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. 405/2023 was lodged at instance of respondent no. 2 under sections498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners.

¶20

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes and the terms of the compromise were reduced into writing in the form of a Settlement dated 27.09.2024 before the Mediation Centre, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi. Pursuant to the aforesaid settlement, petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce on 02.06.2025. It is submitted that Petitioner No. 1 has paid the total settlement amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lacs Only) as per the schedule in settlement . Copy of the Settlement dated 27.09.2024 has been annexed as Annexure P-4 (Colly).

¶21

CRL.M.C. 6089/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶22

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 1.09.2025 18:31:22

¶23

Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officers SI Deepika, from PS Vikaspuri and SI Shweta, P.S.Tilak Nagar.

¶24

Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners without any force, fear, coercion and she has received the total settlement amount and has no objection if the FIR No. 405/2023 is quashed against the Petitioners.

¶25

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 405/2023 is quashed.

¶26

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 .

¶27

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

¶28

CRL.M.C. 6089/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 1.09.2025 18:31:22

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 405/2023, dated 08.08.2023, registered at P.S Vikaspuri, Delhi under section 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

¶34

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶35

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

¶36

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J September 01, 2025 SK

¶37

CRL.M.C. 6089/2025 Page 4 of 4

¶38

Signature Not Verified

¶39

Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 1.09.2025 18:31:22

Puneet Dua & Ors. v. State of NCT Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puneet Dua & Ors. v. State of NCT 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

Sh Devendra Singh Bisht Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Rajpal @ Bable & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rajinder Kumar Jain Vs the State

Kaushlya Devi Vs State, SHO Ps Swaroop Nagar

Aman @ Wasim Khan @ Md. Wasim Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Vishal Mehra & Ors. Vs State Gntcd & Anr.