Sunny Aggarwal & Anr. v. State of Nct. of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC18 Mar 2026CRL.M.C./5214/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRL.M.C. 5214/2022, Delhi High Court, Saurabh Banerjee J, 18.03.2026: quashing of FIR under Section 482 CrPC; FIR No.65/2017 dated 10.02.2017, PS Palam Village, Sections 498A/34 IPC; matrimonial dispute settled by MOU dated 30.03.2021; Rs.5,80,000/- full and final settlement; marriage dissolved under Section 13B(2) Hindu Marriage Act 1995; followed Jitendra Raghuvanshi (2013) 4 SCC 58, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303, Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466; CRL.M.A. 8159/2026 additional bank-statement documents allowed.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No.65/2017 dated 10.02.2017 registered at PS.: Palam Village under Sections 498A/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom; petition allowed and disposed of. ¶¶23

Sunny Aggarwal & Anr. Vs State of Nct. of Delhi & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of FIR No.65/2017 dated 10.02.2017 registered at PS.: Palam Village under Sections 498A/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom; petition allowed and disposed of.

¶¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No.65/2017 dated 10.02.2017 registered at PS.: Palam Village under Sections 498A/34 IPC, and all proceedings emanating therefrom, should be quashed in view of the MOU dated 30.03.2021 and the settlement between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2. +1 more

¶¶17

Court's answer

Since the parties voluntarily settled (MOU dated 30.03.2021) and, following the law laid down in Jitendra Raghuvanshi, Gian Singh and Narinder Singh, nothing remains to corroborate and prove the case of the prosecution, continuation of the FIR against the petitioner will be an exercise in futility.

¶¶22

Ratio / Principle

FIR No.65/2017 dated 10.02.2017 registered at PS.: Palam Village under Sections 498A/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed; the present petition is allowed.

¶¶23

Key takeaways

The parties shall remain bound by all the terms and conditions of the settlement arrived inter se themselves.obiter¶¶19
Notice dispensed with; application CRL.M.A. 8159/2026 allowed and the additional documents (bank account statement evidencing realization of the settlement amount) taken on record.ratio¶¶12
Application CRL.M.A. 8159/2026 disposed of accordingly.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

By order dated 18.03.2026 in CRL.M.C. 5214/2022, the High Court of Delhi (Saurabh Banerjee, J.) allowed the petition under Section 482 CrPC and quashed FIR No.65/2017 dated 10.02.2017 registered at PS.: Palam Village under Sections 498A/34 IPC together with all proceedings emanating therefrom. The quashing rested on the MOU dated 30.03.2021 between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 (complainant), who appeared in person, affirmed receipt of Rs.5,80,000/- as full and final settlement of all her present, past and future claims, and reported dissolution of her marriage with petitioner no.1 by mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995. Following Jitendra Raghuvanshi (2013) 4 SCC 58, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466, the Court held that nothing remained to corroborate the prosecution case and continuance of the FIR would be futile; the parties were to remain bound by the settlement terms. The connected application CRL.M.A. 8159/2026 for placing on record the bank statement evidencing realization of the settlement amount was allowed and disposed of.

¶1

$~22

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 5214/2022

¶4

SUNNY AGGARWAL & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Arjun Malik, Adv. with petitioners in person.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE OF NCT. OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for the State with Ms. Upasna Bakshi and Mr.Arvind Aggarwal, Advs. with SI Rajesh Kumar, PS.: Palam Village. Mr. Ish Preet Singh, Adv. for complainant with complainant in person.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶9

% 18.03.2026

¶10

CRL.M.A. 8159/2026 (for additional documents)

¶11

By virtue of the present application, the petitioner no.1 seeks to bring on record additional document(s), being bank account statement of the petitioner no.1 evidencing the successful realization of the settlement amount.

¶12

For the reasons stated in the present application, as also the nature thereof, notice is dispensed with and the same is allowed. As such, the additional documents are taken on record.

¶13

Accordingly, the present application is disposed of.

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/03/2026 at 12:59:37

¶16

CRL.M.C. 5214/2022

¶17

By virtue of the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( Cr.P.C. ), the petitioners seek quashing of the FIR No.65/2017 dated 10.02.2017 registered at PS.: Palam Village under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ) and all proceedings emanating therefrom, in view of the Memorandum of Understanding ( MOU ) dated 30.03.2021 [ Annexure D ] arrived at between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2, which is accompanied by their respective proofs of identities.

¶18

Issue notice. Learned APP for the State accepts notice, and submits, that he has no objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR. 6. Respondent no.2, present in Court, also accepts notice and affirms the terms of the aforesaid MOU, and submits that the petitioner no.1 has already paid her the total settlement amount of Rs.5,80,000/- as full and final settlement of all her present, past and future claims. She further submits that her marriage with the petitioner no.1 has since been dissolved by mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995, and she has no objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR.

¶19

The petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2, present in Court, as well as their credentials, as on record, have been identified by the IO. 8. Facts disclose that the parties have voluntarily arrived at a settlement, and thus have filed their respective affidavit(s) along with the present petition. As such, the parties shall remain bound by all the terms and conditions of the settlement arrived inter se themselves. Thus, following the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. vs. Babita Raguvanshi & Anr. (2013) 4 SCC 58 , Gian Singh vs. State

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/03/2026 at 12:59:37

¶22

of Punjab & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (2014) 6 SCC 466 , since there is nothing left to corroborate and prove the case of the prosecution, continuation of the aforesaid FIR against the petitioner will be an exercise in futility.

¶23

Rsultantly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.65/2017 dated 10.02.2017 registered at PS.: Palam Village under Sections 498A/34 of the IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed. 10. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶24

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶25

MARCH 18, 2026/ bh

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/03/2026 at 12:59:37

Sunny Aggarwal & Anr. v. State of Nct. of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunny Aggarwal & Anr. 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

State Vs Amir Khan & Ors.

Hitesh Gupta Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Sunil Garg Vs Satyawati Shukla

Umesh Kumar and Anr. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Gaurav Dabas Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Nitil Malik & Ors. Vs the State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.