$~71 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 28th September, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC010464062026 + CRL.M.C. 7239/2026 & CRL.M.A. 30280/2026, CRL.M.A. 30281/2026 RANJIT KUMAR PERUMAL & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. K. Vaijayanthi and Mr. Nagender, Advocates along with petitioner in person Mob: 7011469291 Email: advvaijayanthi04@gmail.com versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP for State SI Nitesh Mahiya, PS Sagarpur Mr. Santosh Kumar and Mr. Dipanshu Sharma, Advocates for R-2 with Respondent no. 2 in person Mob: 7701925499 Email: advocatedipanshu@gmail.com CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (Oral): 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“CrPC”), seeking quashing of the First Information Report (“FIR”) being FIR No. 577/2022, dated 23rd August, 2022, registered at Police Station (“PS”) Sagarpur, South West District, Delhi, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”), and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, on the ground of settlement. 2. A Chargesheet dated 11th May, 2023, has been filed by the concerned Investigating Officer (“IO”) in respect of the aforesaid FIR before the Trial Court. 3. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned Additional Public Prosecutor (“APP”) appearing for the State, i.e., respondent no. 1, as well as by learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2, who is present before this Court. 4. As per the documents on record, the following facts have been culled out: 4.1. FIR No. 577/2022 was registered at the instance of respondent no. 2 against the petitioners, who are her family members, namely, her husband, petitioner no. 1 and her mother-in-law, petitioner no. 2. 4.2. Petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 starting living separately from 29th August, 2021, after differences arose during their marriage, and they have not resumed cohabitation since then. 4.3. Respondent no. 2 has alleged, inter alia, that the petitioners refused to return her jewellery and made unlawful dowry demands on multiple occasions. 5. The parties, who are present in Court, have been identified by their respective counsels as well as the IO. They confirm that the matter has been settled. 6. This Court is informed that petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 have executed a Settlement Agreement dated 09th December, 2024, before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, whereby, it was agreed, inter alia, that petitioner no. 1 would pay Rs. 10,00,000/- to respondent no. 2 in four instalments. 7. It is noted that the aforesaid amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- was payable to respondent no. 2 in the following manner: (i) Rs. 2,50,000/- on or before 05th January, 2025; (ii) Rs. 2,50,000/- at the time of recording the statement of the parties for the first motion petition for divorce; (iii) Rs. 2,50,000/- at the time of recording the statement of the parties for the second motion petition for divorce; (iv) Rs. 2,50,000/- at the time of quashing of FIR No. 577/2022. 8. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 submits that the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 have resolved their matrimonial disputes and their marriage already stands dissolved. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that out of the total amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-, only Rs. 2,50,000/- remains due and payable to respondent no. 2. 10. The aforesaid amount has been duly paid to respondent no. 2 before this Court. 11. Respondent no. 2, who is present in Court, confirms receipt of the said amount, and submits that she does not wish to press the present proceedings any further. 12. Learned APP appearing for the State submits that she has no objection to the present petition in view of the fact that the matter pertained to a matrimonial dispute. 13. In respect of the offences in FIR No. 577/2022, this Court notes that the offence under Section 498A of the IPC is non-compoundable. 14. The Supreme Court has held that under Section 528 of the BNSS, High Courts may quash criminal proceedings, even with respect to non-compoundable offences, if the concerned parties have arrived at a compromise or settlement, and particularly when no overarching public interest is adversely affected by quashing the same. 15. In Jitendra Raghuvanshi and Others Versus Babita Raghuvanshi and Another, (2013) 4 SCC 58, the Supreme Court has held as under: “xxx xxx xxx 14. The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are wide and unfettered. In B.S. Joshi [(2003) 4 SCC 675 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 848] , this Court has upheld the powers of the High Court under Section 482 to quash criminal proceedings where dispute is of a private nature and a compromise is entered into between the parties who are willing to settle their differences amicably. We are satisfied that the said decision is directly applicable to the case on hand and the High Court ought to have quashed the criminal proceedings by accepting the settlement arrived at. 15. In our view, it is the duty of the courts to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes, particularly, when the same are on considerable increase. Even if the offences are non-compoundable, if they relate to matrimonial disputes and the Court is satisfied that the parties have settled the same amicably and without any pressure, we hold that for the purpose of securing ends of justice, Section 320 of the Code would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing of FIR, complaint or the subsequent criminal proceedings. xxx xxx xxx” (Emphasis Supplied) 16. This Court notes the fact that the parties have amicably settled their matrimonial dispute and that petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 are already divorced. 17. This Court has also interacted with respondent no. 2, who has affirmed that she has voluntarily entered into the Settlement Agreement dated 09th December, 2024, without any force, coercion, pressure or undue influence. 18. Accordingly, considering the submissions made before this Court, FIR No. 577/2022 dated 23rd August, 2022, registered at PS Sagarpur, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed. 19. The parties will remain bound by the terms of the said Settlement Agreement. 20. The petition, along with the pending applications, is accordingly disposed of. MINI PUSHKARNA, J SEPTEMBER 28, 2026 ak Page 2 of 2