Divyanshu Kalra & Ors. Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

¶1

$~47

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of decision: 10.10.2025

¶4

- CRL.M.C. 7194/2025 & CRL.M.A. 30203/2025 EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES ETC.

¶5

DIVYANSHU KALRA & ORS. … Petitioners Through: Mr. Manu Sishodia, Adv. along with petitioners in person.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. … Respondents Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP with SI Vinay, PS Lajpat Nagar. Mr. Shashi Shanker, Mr. Kartik Pathak, Advs. for R-2 along with R- 2 in person.

¶8

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶9

JUDGMENT(ORAL)

¶10

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

¶11

This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 491/2020, dated 30.12.2020, registered at P.S Lajpat Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶12

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 24.01.2019 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies. No

¶13

CRL.M.C. 7194/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶14

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 0.10.2025 18:45:58

¶15

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 11.01.2020.

¶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. Chargesheet has since been filed under sections 498A/406/354/34 IPC against the petitioners.

¶17

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes before the Mediation Centre, Saket Courts, New Delhi and the terms of settlement were written in the form of a Settlement dated 18.11.2024. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce by mutual consent on 22.04.2025 and petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) to respondent no. 2 as per the schedule in the settlement. Copy of the Settlement dated 18.11.2024 has been annexed as Annexure P-2.

¶18

Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Vinay from PS Lajpat Nagar.

¶19

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 amount and has no objection if the FIR No. 491/2020 is quashed against the Petitioners.

¶20

CRL.M.C. 7194/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶21

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 0.10.2025 18:45:58

¶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. 491/2020 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 if the parties have reached an amicable settlement. Reliance may be placed upon B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC .

¶25

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.

¶26

CRL.M.C. 7194/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶27

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 0.10.2025 18:45:58

¶28

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 491/2020, dated 30.12.2020, registered at P.S Lajpat Nagar, Delhi under section 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

¶29

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶30

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

¶31

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
October 10, 2025
SK

¶32

CRL.M.C. 7194/2025 Page 4 of 4

¶33

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 0.10.2025 18:45:58

Divyanshu Kalra & Ors. v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Divyanshu Kalra & 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

Manish Yadav Vs the State of N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr.

Pesi Shavak Patel Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Mohd. Imran Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Naveen Dabas Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Anirudh Dawar & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Jitesh Kumar Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.