Allowed

Ajay Kumar & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC8 Dec 2025CRL.M.C./8767/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing petition under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashal of a dowry-related FIR after matrimonial settlement, mutual-consent divorce and full payment of settlement amount. Respondent and State raised no objection; court quashed the FIR and all proceedings.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 213/2024 dated 25.06.2024, P.S. Sunlight Colony under sections 498A/406/34/354(A)/509 IPC and all consequential proceedings quashed.

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

¶1

$~75

¶2

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

¶3

% Date of decision: 08.12.2025

¶4

CRL.M.C.8767/2025 & CRL.M.A. 36531/2025EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES ETC. AJAY KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Nidhi Lakra, Ms. Komal Kohli, Ms. Prachi Verma, Mr. Nirdesh Bidhuri, Advs. along with petitioners in person.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP with SI Shantanu, PS Sunlight Colony.

¶7

Mr. Sajid Ahmed, Mr. Firoz Iqbal Khan, Mr. Mohammad Faizan, 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. 213/2024, dated 25.06.2024, registered at P.S Sunlight Colony, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34/354(A)/509 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

¶12

CRL.M.C. 8767/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶13

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 9.12.2025 10:45:40

¶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 16.02.2010 as per Sikh Rites and ceremonies at New Delhi. Two children were born out of the said wedlock. Due to temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent no. 2 have been living separately since 15.06.2023.

¶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. She further alleged that petitioner nos. 4 to 6 molested, inappropriately touched her and passed lewd remarks. Chargesheet has since been filed under sections 498A/406/34/354(A)/509 IPC against the Petitioners.

¶16

During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes before Counselling cell, Family Court, (South East) Saket, New Delhi and the terms of the compromise were reduced into writing in the form of a Settlement dated 23.08.2024. It is submitted that petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce by mutual consent on 25.04.2025 and petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) to respondent no. 2 as per the schedule of the settlement. It is further submitted that the custody of the children is with petitioner no. 1 with visitation rights to respondent no. 2. Copy of the Settlement dated 23.08.2024 has been annexed as Annexure P-3.

¶17

CRL.M.C. 8767/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶18

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 9.12.2025 10:45:40

¶19

Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Shantanu, PS Sunlight Colony.

¶20

Respondent no. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners without any force, fear, coercion and she has received the total settlement amount and has no objection if the FIR No. 213/2024 is quashed against the Petitioners.

¶21

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 213/2024 is quashed.

¶22

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 .

¶23

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

¶24

CRL.M.C. 8767/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶25

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Da te:0 9.12.2025 10:45:40

¶26

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

¶28

The petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 213/2024, dated 25.06.2024, registered at P.S Sunlight Colony, Delhi under section 498A/406/34/354(A)/509 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

¶29