$~74				
*	IN THE  HIGH COURT  OF DELHI  AT NEW  DELHI
%						Date of decision: 08.12.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ 	CRL.M.C. 8751/2025

JAI KUMAR & ORS.				.....Petitioners
Through:	Mr. Lalit Chauhan, Mr. Rajesh Chauhan, Ms. Nikita Chauhan, Mr. Jai Kumar, Mr. Vinod Kumar, Mr. Vijay Kumar, Ms. Shri Raj, Advs. along with petitioners in person.
				versus

	STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. 		.....Respondents
Through:	Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP with Insp. Kuldeep  Singh, PS Uttam Nagar and SI Sumita.
	Ms. Pooja Kumari, Adv. for R-2 along with 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. 673/2021, dated 26.08.2021, registered at P.S Uttam Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.
2.	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 20.02.2011 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies at Delhi. Two children were born out of the said wedlock. However, on account of temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 lived separately for about one year.
3.	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. FIR No. 673/2021 was lodged at the instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Uttam Nagar under sections 498A/406 IPC against the petitioners. Subsequently Chargesheet was filed under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC.
4.	During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes and the terms of settlement were written in the form of Settlement Agreement dated 31.08.2025.It is submitted that the petitioner no.1 and respondent No. 2 have resumed cohabitation since last about three years and are presently living together in an atmosphere of peace and harmony as per the schedule in the settlement. Copy of the settlement agreement dated 31.08.2025has been annexed as Annexure P-3.
5.	Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer Insp. Kuldeep  Singh and SI Sumita, from PS Uttam Nagar.
6.	Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners without any force, fear, coercion and she has no objection if the FIR No. 673/2021 is quashed against the Petitioners.

7.	In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 673/2021 is quashed. 

8.	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.

9.	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 if the parties have reached an amicable settlement. Reliance may be placed upon B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC.
10.	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.

11.	In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 673/2021, dated 26.08.2021, registered at P.S Uttam Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed. 
12.	Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 
13.	Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.


RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
December 8, 2025
MA








CRL.M.C. 8751/2025                                                                                                                                              Page 1 of 4