Allowed¶19

Amit Kumar & Ors. v. the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC3 Nov 2025CRL.M.C./6209/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR on matrimonial settlement; inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS / Section 482 CrPC; non-compoundable offences Sections 498A/406/34 IPC; FIR No. 482/2021 PS Palam Village; settlement deed 01.08.2023 Mediation Centre Dwarka Courts; Rs. 30,00,000/- full and final settlement; divorce decree 19.10.2024 under Section 13B Hindu Marriage Act; reliance on State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688 and Ramgopal v. State of M.P. 2021 INSC 568; voluntariness of compromise verified in Court; rights of children reserved.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 482/2021 registered at Police Station - Palam Village for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, qua the present petitioners; petition and pending application(s), if any, disposed of. ¶19

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 482/2021 registered at Police Station - Palam Village for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC should be quashed on the basis of the Settlement Deed dated 01.08.2023 arrived at between the parties. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

In view of the settlement between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petition was allowed and FIR No. 482/2021 registered at Police Station - Palam Village for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, together with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, stands quashed qua the present petitioners.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

In cases involving non-compoundable offences that are private in nature and arise out of matrimonial/family disputes with a settlement/compromise between the victim and the accused, the High Court is required to consider the conduct and antecedents of the accused to ascertain that the settlement was entered into voluntarily and was not imposed upon the complainant.

¶15

Key takeaways

The Court found the compromise genuine and voluntary: respondent no. 2, present in Court, categorically stated she had settled the entirety of disputes amicably and of her own free will without pressure or coercion; she had received the entire settled amount, raised no allegation of bad conduct by the petitioners after the compromise, and had no objection to the FIR being quashed.ratio¶18
Children from the wedlock, if any, remain free to assert their rights in accordance with law; their rights are not extinguished by the quashing of the FIR.obiter¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Ajay Digpaul, J.) allowed a petition under Section 528 BNSS (erstwhile Section 482 CrPC) filed by Amit Kumar & Ors. seeking quashing of FIR No. 482/2021, PS Palam Village, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC. The marriage (solemnized 28.11.2010) had broken down; respondent no. 2 (complainant/wife) had registered the FIR, but the parties settled their disputes on 01.08.2023 before the Mediation Centre, Dwarka Courts, for a lump sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- covering dowry articles, stridhan, marriage expenses, jewellery, gifts and past/present/future maintenance and permanent alimony, and obtained a divorce decree dated 19.10.2024 under Section 13B HMA. Relying on State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688 and Ramgopal v. State of M.P., 2021 INSC 568, the Court held that inherent powers may be exercised to quash even non-compoundable offences that are private in nature and lack serious societal impact where the compromise is genuine; satisfied that the complainant, personally present, had settled voluntarily without coercion and had no objection, the Court quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings qua the petitioners, while leaving children from the wedlock free to assert their rights in accordance with law.

¶1

$~66

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 6209/2025 & CRL.M.A. 32246/2025 AMIT KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶4

Through: Mr. Saurabh Sachdeva, Adv. Petitioners in person (through VC)

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP for State with Ms. Upasna Bakshi, Adv. ASI Laxmi, PS Palam Village Ms. Ragini Juneja, Adv. for R-2 along with R-2

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL O R D E R % 03.11.2025 CRL.M.A. 32251/2025 (Preponing the hearing)

¶9

1. The present application has been filed on behalf of the petitioners to prepone the date of hearing of the present petition.

¶10

2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.

¶11

3. The application stands disposed of.

¶12

4. The date already fixed, i.e., 27.11.2025 stands cancelled.

¶13

CRL.M.C. 6209/2025

¶14

5. The instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter “BNSS”) [earlier 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 No. 482/2021, registered at Police Station – Palam Village, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”).

¶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 13/11/2025 at 11:50:42

¶17

6. The brief facts concerning the present dispute are that the marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 was solemnized on 28.11.2010, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. However, due to some temperamental differences between them, shortly after their marriage, they started living separately.

¶18

7. Despite efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle their differences, pursuant to which respondent no. 2 got FIR No. 482/2021 registered.

¶19

8. However, at this stage, with the intervention of family members and relatives, both the parties have entered a settlement on 01.08.2023 before the Mediation Centre, Dwarka Courts, Delhi. The terms and conditions of the said settlement are mentioned in the Settlement Deed which is annexed as “Annexure P-3” 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 19.10.2024 was passed by the Court concerned.

¶20

9. 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 ₹30,00,000/-.

¶21

10. It is, thus, prayed that the instant FIR be quashed on the basis of Settlement Deed dated 01.08.2023.

¶22

11. 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

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

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 13/11/2025 at 11:50:42

¶25

of the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶26

12. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 13. 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.

¶27

14. 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.

¶28

15. 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.

¶29

16. 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.

¶30

17. 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

¶31

This is a digitally signed order.

¶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 13/11/2025 at 11:50:42

¶33

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.

¶34

18. 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.

¶35

19. 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. 482/2021, registered at Police Station – Palam Village, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed qua the present petitioners.

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

AJAY DIGPAUL, J

¶39

NOVEMBER 3, 2025 /ar/ yr

¶40

This is a digitally signed order.

¶41

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 13/11/2025 at 11:50:42

Amit Kumar & Ors. v. the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar & Ors. v. the 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

Sarbeswar Sahoo Vs the State Govt NCT of Delhi

Kaushal Bhardwaj Vs the State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Mukesh Kumar Dwivedi Vs State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

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

Mobeen Siddiqui and Others Vs State of N.C.T. of Delhi and Others

State NCT of Delhi Vs Bimla