Ajay Sharma & Ors. Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2026)

Ajay Sharma & Ors. Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of FIR No. 142/2022 of PS Karawal Nagar for offence under Section 406/498A/34 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, together with all proceedings arising out of the same.

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 142/2022 of PS Karawal Nagar (offence under Section 406/498A/34 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act) and the proceedings arising out of it should be quashed on the ground that respondent no.2, the de facto complainant, has compromised all disputes with the petitioners.

Court's answer

Having personally spoken with respondent no.2 (present through videoconferencing, identified by IO/ASI Vikram Singh), who confirmed she had compromised all disputes, received full and final settlement for stridhan and maintenance, and did not wish to continue prosecution, the court was satisfied that it would be in the interest of justice not to push the parties through a full dress trial.

Ratio / Principle

The petition is allowed and FIR No. 142/2022 of PS Karawal Nagar for offence under Section 406/498A/34 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, as well as all proceedings arising out of the same, are quashed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Justice Girish Kathpalia, oral judgment, decided 01.07.2026) allowed CRL.M.C. 1981/2026 filed by Ajay Sharma & Ors. and quashed FIR No. 142/2022 of PS Karawal Nagar, registered for offence under Section 406/498A/34 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, along with all proceedings arising out of it. The quashing rested on the verified compromise: respondent no.2, the de facto complainant, appeared through videoconferencing, was identified by IO/ASI Vikram Singh, and told the court (in Hindi) that she had compromised all disputes with the petitioners, had received complete full and final settlement amount in lieu of her entire stridhan and maintenance, and did not wish to continue prosecution. Her marriage with petitioner no.1 stood already dissolved by decree of divorce, and their son is in her custody. The State raised no objection, and statements of the parties had earlier been recorded by the concerned Joint Registrar. The court held it would be in the interest of justice not to push the parties through a full dress trial.

$~7

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 01.07.2026

- CRL.M.C. 1981/2026

AJAY SHARMA & ORS. .....Petitioners

Through: Mr. Umesh Kumar, Advocate

versus

THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

.....Respondents

Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for State with ASI Vikram Singh.

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

Petitioners seek quashing of case FIR No. 142/2022 of PS Karawal Nagar for offence under Section 406/498A/34 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act on the ground that complainant de facto ( respondent no.2 ) has compromised the disputes with the petitioners.

State has no objection to this petition. Statements of parties have already been recorded by the concerned Joint Registrar.

CRL.M.C. 1981/2026

Page 1 of 2 pages

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,

Signature Not Verified

2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afe GIRISH c45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, KATHPALIA postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff8 01e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.07.01 17:03:52 +05'30'

Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Da te:0 1.07.2026 17:09:11

The respondent no.2 is present through videoconferencing and is identified by IO/ASI Vikram Singh. I have spoken with respondent no.2 in Hindi and it is stated by her that she has compromised all disputes with the petitioners. Marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 stands already dissolved by way of decree of divorce. One son was born from wedlock between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2; that son of parties is in custody of respondent no.2. The respondent no.2 submits that she has received complete full and final settlement amount in lieu of her entire stridhan and maintenance. Respondent no.2 submits that she does not wish to continue prosecution of petitioners.

Having spoken with respondent no.2, I am satisfied that it would be in the interest of justice not to push the parties through full dress trial.

Therefore, the petition is allowed and FIR No. 142/2022 of PS Karawal Nagar for offence under Section 406/498A/34 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act as well as proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4af GIRISH ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacc a, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, KATHPALIA serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965f f801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.07.01 17:03:40 +05'30'

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE)

JULY 01, 2026/as

CRL.M.C. 1981/2026

Page 2 of 2 pages

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Da te:0 1.07.2026 17:09:11