Allowed

Tarun Kumar & Ors. v. the State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Delhi HC4 Dec 2025CRL.M.C./7023/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 528 BNSS sought quashing of a dowry-related FIR after matrimonial settlement, divorce, and full payment of the settlement amount. The complainant and State raised no objection. Relying on Supreme Court precedent favouring quietus in settled matrimonial disputes, the court allowed the petition.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 0692/2021 dated 01.12.2021 at PS Vivek Vihar under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all consequential proceedings quashed; pending applications disposed of.

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

¶1

$~18

¶2

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

¶3

% Date of decision: 04.12.2025

¶4

CRL.M.C. 7023/2025 & CRL.M.A. 29499/2025 EXEMPTION TARUN KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Sachin Kumar, Mr. Deepak Garg, Mr. Siddharth Srivastava, Adv.

¶5

Petitioners No. 1 & 3 are present in person Petitioner No. 2 through its SPA holder Mr. Tarun Kumar, present in person

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.....Respondents Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP with SI Sumeet Parik, PS Vivek Vihar

¶8

Mr. Ramneek Mishra, and Mr. Ajun Jain, Adv. for R-2. Respondent No. 2 is present 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. 0692/2021, dated 01.12.2021,registered at P.S Vivek Vihar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶13

CRL.M.C. 7023/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶14

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 5.12.2025 11:21:50

¶15

The factual matrix giving rise to the instant case is that the marriage between Petitioner No. 1and Respondent no. 2/complainant was solemnized on 16.02.2020 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 16.04.2022.

¶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. FIR No. 0692/2021 was lodged at the instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Vivek Vihar under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners. Subsequently Chargesheet was filed.

¶17

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes before Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi and the terms of settlement were written in the form of Settlement dated 03.10.2024. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce on 08.04.2025 and the petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 6,50,000/(Rupees Six Lac Fifty Thousand Only) to respondent no. 2 as per the schedule in the settlement. Copy of the settlement agreement dated 03.10.2024 has been annexed as Annexure P-3.

¶18

Petitioner No. 1 is physically present for self and for petitioner no.2 as her SPA, petitioner no.3 and respondent no.2 are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective

¶19

CRL.M.C. 7023/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶20

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 5.12.2025 11:21:50

¶21

counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Sumeet Parik, from PS Vivek Vihar.

¶22

Respondent No. 2confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners without any force, fear, coercion and she has received the entire settlement and has no objection if the FIR No. 0692/2021is quashed against the Petitioners.

¶23

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 0692/2021is quashed.

¶24

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 Live Law (SC) 74, Jitendra Raghuvanshi& Ors. vs Babita Raghuvanshi &Anr., (2013) 4 SCC 58& in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 .

¶25

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

¶26

CRL.M.C. 7023/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶27

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 5.12.2025 11:21:50

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 0692/2021, dated 01.12.2021,registered at P.S Vivek Vihar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

¶31

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶32

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

¶33

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J December 4, 2025 MA

¶34

CRL.M.C. 7023/2025 Page 4 of 4

¶35

Signature Not Verified

¶36

Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 5.12.2025 11:21:50

Tarun Kumar & Ors. v. the State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarun Kumar & Ors. v. the State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aarif @ Bihari Vs the State of NCT Delhi

Hemant Singh Rawat & Ors. Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Raj Mishra Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Durgesh Kumar Vs State (National Capital Territory of Delhi) & Ors.

Gautam Anand & Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Rajiv Bakshi & Ors. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.