Kshitij Raghav & Ors. Vs the State N.Ct of Delhi and Anr.

¶1

$~16

¶2

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

¶3

% Date of decision: 05.12.2025

¶4

CRL.M.C. 7756/2025 KSHITIJ RAGHAV & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Vijay Arora, Mr. Arun Raghav & Mr. Sunil Singh Rawat, Advocates along with petitioners in person.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE N.CT OF DELHI AND ANR. … Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, APP with WSI Jyoti & ASI Ballabh, PS Kanjhawala Mr. G.S. Arora & Mr. Ajay Gupta, Advocates for R-2 along with R-2 in person.

¶7

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA JUDGMENT(ORAL)

¶8

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

¶9

This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 276/2022, dated 14.04.2022, registered at P.S Kanjhawala (Rohini District), Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶10

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

¶11

CRL.M.C. 7756/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶12

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 6.12.2025 10:55:05

¶13

was solemnized on 26.01.2020 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies at Delhi. 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 16.12.2021.

¶14

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. 276/2022 was lodged at the instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Kanjhawala under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners.

¶15

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini District Courts, Delhi and the terms of settlement were written in the form of a Settlement Agreement dated 22.02.2024. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce on 13.08.2025 and petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 3,12,000/(Rupees Three Lacs Twelve Thousandonly) and return/exchange of certain articles (as per annexure A of settlement) to respondent no. 2 as per the schedule in the settlement. Copy of the Settlement dated 22.02.2024 has been annexed as Annexure P-3.

¶16

Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer WSI Jyoti & ASI Ballabh, PS Kanjhawala.

¶17

CRL.M.C. 7756/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶18

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 6.12.2025 10:55:05

¶19

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 along with articles and has no objection if the FIR No. 276/2022 is quashed against the Petitioners.

¶20

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 276/2022 is quashed.

¶21

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 .

¶22

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 .

¶23

CRL.M.C. 7756/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶24

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 6.12.2025 10:55:05

¶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, it would be in the interest of justice, to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶26

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 276/2022, dated 14.04.2022, registered at P.S Kanjhawala (Rohini District), Delhi under section 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

¶27

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶28

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

¶29

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J December 05, 2025 MA

¶30

CRL.M.C. 7756/2025 Page 4 of 4

¶31

Signature Not Verified

¶32

Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 6.12.2025 10:55:05

Kshitij Raghav & Ors. v. the State N.Ct of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kshitij Raghav & Ors. v. the State N.Ct 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

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

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

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

Varun Kwatra Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.

Neeraj Agrawal Vs Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Sangeeta @Sanyogita Vs State of NCT Delhi through SHO P.S Kotla Mubarakpur & Anr.