$~7				
*	IN THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
%						Date of decision: 06.12.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ 	CRL.M.C. 7418/2025
	PRAVEEN KUMAR YADAV				.....Petitioner
Through:	Mr. Shivajee Shukla, Mr. Lakshaya Magan, Mr. Saquib Neshant and Ms. Neha Sen Saluja, Adv.
	Petitioner in person.

				versus

	THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR  .....Respondents
Through: 	Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP with SI Meenakshi, P.S.Neb Sarai.
	R-2 in person.

CORAM:-	
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

      JUDGMENT(ORAL)
      
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J. 

1.	 This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 337/2014, dated 27.04.2014, registered at P.S Neb Sarai, Delhi under sections 506/509/354/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.
2.	As per allegations made in the FIR, respondent no. 2 was subjected to continuous harassment through abusive, obscene, and threatening calls, SMS, and emails from petitioner and his father despite existing protection orders under the Domestic Violence Act. Chargesheet has since been filed under sections 506/509/354D/34 IPCagainst the petitioners.
3.	It is submitted that during the pendency of the proceedings the parties have amicably resolved their disputes. They earlier executed a deed of settlement dated 18.10.2020. Respondent no. 2 was not satisfied with the said settlement. Parties thereafter settled their dispute in Mediation Centre, Saket Courts vide agreement dated 11.08.2025. 
4.	It has been further submitted that pursuant to previous settlement dated 18.10.2020 between the parties, a two BHK flat has been purchased for a sum of Rs. 34 Lacs in the joint name of petitioner and respondent no. 2 on 15.07.2020 wherein respondent no. 2 is residing. As per the settlement deed dated 11.08.2025 it has been agreed by the parties that petitioner and respondent no. 2 shall not live in the aforesaid flat together atleast one year before execution of the settlement agreement unless and until their daughter named Diksha would pass the senior secondary class and get admission in further course/college. The copy of the settlement deed dated 18.10.2020 and 11.08.2025 are annexed as annexure P5 (colly). 
5.	Parties are physically present before the Court They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Meenakshi from PS Neb Sarai. Respondent No.2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioner without any force, fear, coercion and she has no objection if the FIR No. 337/2014 is quashed against the Petitioner. 
6.	In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 337/2014 is quashed. 
7.	In Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under:-
"61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings."
8.	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. Reliance may be placed upon B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675.
9.	In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the fact that parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No. 337/2014, dated 27.04.2014, registered at P.S Neb Sarai, Delhi under sections 506/509/354/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom.

10.	In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 337/2014, dated 27.04.2014, registered at P.S Neb Sarai, Delhi under sections 506/509/354/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed. 
11.	Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 
12.	Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.


RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
DECEMBER 06, 2025
SK








CRL.M.C. 7418/2025	                                                                                                                                                 Page 1 of 4