Dhawan Kumar & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

¶1

$~28

¶2

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

¶3

% Date of decision: 14.11.2025

¶4

CRL. M.C 8093/2025 & CRL.M.A. 33806/2025 EXEMPTION DHAWAN KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Yogender Dagur, Mr. Nrusingh Patra, Ms. Neetu Gupta, Mr. Raja Panda, Advocates.

¶5

Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 in person. Petitioner Nos. 4 to 6 through VC.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Priyanka Dalal, APP with SI Anmol Lavish, PS-Hauz Khas. Mr. Vivek Vishal Gautam, Advocate. Respondent No. 2 in person.

¶8

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

¶9

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

¶10

This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 234/2022, dated 14.06.2022, registered at P.S Hauz Khas Delhi under Sections

¶11

CRL.M.C. 8093//2025 Page 1 of 4

¶12

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 5.11.2025 11:10:04

¶13

498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶14

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 19.11.2018 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. 1 and Respondent No. 2 are living separately since 22.08.2021.

¶15

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. 234/2022 was lodged at the instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Hauz Khas under sections 498A/406/34IPC against the petitioners. Subsequently Chargesheet was filed.

¶16

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes before the Mediation Centre, Saket Courts and the terms of settlement were written in the form of a Settlement dated 01.04.2024. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce on 25.04.2025 and petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 6,50,000/- (Rs. Six Lacs Fifty Thousand Only) to respondent no. 2 along with the exchange of articles as per the list attached with the settlement as per the schedule

¶17

CRL.M.C. 8093//2025 Page 2 of 4

¶18

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 5.11.2025 11:10:04

¶19

in the settlement. Copy of the settlement dated 01.04.2024 has been annexed as Annexure P-3.

¶20

Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 and respondent No. 2 are physically - present before the Court while petitioner Nos. 4 to 6 have entered their appearance through VC. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Anmol Lavish, PSHauz Khas.

¶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 settlement amount and has no objection if the FIR No. 234/2022 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. 234/2022 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

CRL.M.C. 8093//2025 Page 3 of 4

¶25

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 5.11.2025 11:10:04

¶26

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 .

¶27

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.

¶28

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 234/2022, dated 14.06.2022, registered at P.S Hauz Khas Delhi under Sections 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

¶32

November 14, 2025/ MA

¶33

CRL.M.C. 8093//2025 Page 4 of 4

¶34

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:1 5.11.2025 11:10:04

Dhawan Kumar & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhawan Kumar & Ors. v. State 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

Devraj Taneja Vs CBI

Shyamal Dutta @ Dr.Shyamal Dutta Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Sachin Rai Vs State NCT of Delhi

Vivek Kushwaha Vs Anuradha Kushwaha

Raj Kumar Vs State of NCT Delhi

Deepa Chawla and Others Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) and Others