Sanju @ Ashwani & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

¶1

$~57

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of decision: 10.09.2025

¶4

- CRL.M.C. 6372/2025 & CRL.M.A. 26924/2025 EXEMPTION

¶5

SANJU @ ASHWANI & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶6

Through: Mr. Neeraj Kumar Dwivedi, Adv. Petitioners in person.

¶7

versus

¶8

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP with SI Deepanshu, P.S.Harsh Vihar. Ms. Shivani Singh, Adv. for R- 2. R-2 in person.

¶9

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶10

JUDGMENT(ORAL)

¶11

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

¶12

This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 849/2021, dated 29.10.2021,registered at P.S Harsh Vihar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34/323/506 IPC & section 4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶13

CRL.M.C. 6372/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶14

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 0.09.2025 17:11:15

¶15

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 09.02.2019 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies at New Delhi. No child was born out of the said wedlock. However, on account of temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 are living separately since 05.02.2021.

¶16

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. She further submits that petitioner no. 1 killed her 6 months old fetus. FIR No. 849/2021 was lodged at instance of Respondent no. 2 under sections 498A/406/34/323/506 IPC & section 4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶17

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts and the terms of the compromise were reduced into writing in the form of a Mediation Settlement dated 09.01.2025. In view of the aforesaid settlement, petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce on 22.07.2025 . It is submitted that petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 6,40,000/- (Rupees Six Lacs Forty Thousand only). Copy of the Mediation Settlement dated 09.01.2025 has been annexed as Annexure P-2.

¶18

CRL.M.C. 6372/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶19

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 0.09.2025 17:11:15

¶20

Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Deepanshu from P.S.Harsh Vihar.

¶21

Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners without any force, fear, coercion and she has received the entire settlement amount and has no objection if the FIR No. 849/2021 is quashed against the Petitioners.

¶22

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 849/2021 is quashed.

¶23

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 .

¶24

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

¶25

CRL.M.C. 6372/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶26

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 0.09.2025 17:11:15

¶27

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

¶28

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 abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶29

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 849/2021, dated 29.10.2021, registered at P.S Harsh Vihar, Delhi under section 498A/406/34/323/506 IPC & section 4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

¶30

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶31

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

¶32

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

¶33

September 10, 2025 SK

¶34

CRL.M.C. 6372/2025 Page 4 of 4

¶35

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 0.09.2025 17:11:15

Sanju @ Ashwani & Ors. v. the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanju @ Ashwani & Ors. v. the State 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

Braham Prakash Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Ms Riza Puri Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Rupak Chaterjee @ Aryan Ved Chaterjee @ Rehan Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Yash Desai Vs the State of NCT of Dehi

X & Ors. Vs State N.Ct of Delhi and Anr.

G.D.Venkatesh Vs State Govt. Ofnct of Delhi and Ors.