Allowed

Naresh Kumar and Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC4 Nov 2025CRL.M.C./7757/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 528 BNSS sought quashing of FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC following a settlement between the estranged spouses, who had obtained divorce and paid the settlement amount. The complainant and the State raised no objection. The court quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 185/2023 dated 01.07.2023 registered at P.S. Roop Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all consequential proceedings quashed.

Naresh Kumar and Ors. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~56

¶2

I� THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT �EW DELHI

¶3

% Date of decision: 04.11.2025

¶4

- CRL.M.C. 7757/2025 & CRL.M.A. 32458/2025 Exemption NARESH KUMAR AND ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Robin Kumar and Mr. Ketan Kumar, Advs. along with petitioners in person.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

¶8

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP with SI Aarti Jha, PS Roop Nagar. Mr. Maharaj Singh, Adv. for R- 2 along with R-2 in person.

¶9

CORAM:HO�'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI�DER DUDEJA

¶10

JUDGME�T(ORAL)

¶11

RAVI�DER DUDEJA, J.

¶12

This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 185/2023, dated 01.07.2023, registered at P.S Roop Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶13

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 04.02.2016 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies at

¶14

CRL.M.C. 7757/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶15

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 4.11.2025 18:48:43

¶16

New Delhi. One 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 04.02.2022.

¶17

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. 185/2023 was lodged at the instance of Respondent no. 2 under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners.

¶18

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes before the Family Courts, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and the terms of the compromise were reduced into writing in the form of a Settlement dated 08.08.2024. It is submitted that petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce on 02.06.2025 and petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Lacs only) to respondent no. 2 as per the schedule in the settlement. It is further submitted that the custody of the child is with respondent no. 2 with no visitation rights to petitioner no. 1. Copy of the Settlement dated 08.08.2024 has been annexed as Annexure as A-5.

¶19

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

¶20

CRL.M.C. 7757/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶21

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 4.11.2025 18:48:43

¶22

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. 185/2023 is 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. 185/2023 is 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 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 .

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

¶26

CRL.M.C. 7757/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶27

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 4.11.2025 18:48:43

¶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. 185/2023, dated 01.07.2023, registered at P.S Roop Nagar, Delhi under section 498A/406/34 IPC and 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

RAVI�DER DUDEJA, J �ovember 04, 2025 SK

¶33

CRL.M.C. 7757/2025 Page 4 of 4

¶34

Signature Not Verified

¶35

Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 4.11.2025 18:48:43

Naresh Kumar and Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naresh Kumar and Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

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

Shadab Ali & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Pankaj Kakkar & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Mohamed Ali Jinnah Vs National Investigation Agency

Prashant Kumar Singh & Ors. Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Justice Uzochukwu Igantius Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Tv Today Network Ltd. & Ors. Vs Rajpal Powsal