$~48				
*	IN THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
%						Date of decision: 30.10.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ 	CRL.M.C. 7619/2025 & CRL.M.A. 31902/2025 EXEMPTION
SHAHNAWAZ ALAM & ORS.	               .....Petitioners
Through: 	Mr. Shubham Singh Mahur, Ms. Shivani Vasan, Advocates.
	Petitioners in person.
				versus

	THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.     … Respondents
Through:	Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP with SI Prajjwal, PS-Prem Nagar.
	Respondent No. 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. 444/2024, dated 21.08.2024, registered at P.S Prem Nagar, District Rohini, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 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 01.08.2019 as per Muslim Rites and ceremonies. No Child was born out of the said wedlock. Due to temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent no. 2 have been living separately since 02.04.2024.
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. 444/2024 was lodged at the instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Prem Nagar, District Rohini under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the Petitioners. 
4.	During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes before Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini District Courts, Delhi and the terms of settlement were written in the form of a Settlement/Agreement dated 31.01.2025. It is submitted that Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No. 2 have obtained divorce according to Muslim law (Talaq-E-Khula) on 28.04.2025 and petitioner no. 1 has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- (Rupees Four Lacs Fifty Thousand only) to respondent no. 2 as per the schedule in settlement. Copy of the Settlement/Agreement dated 31.01.2025 has been annexed as Annexure P-2 (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 Prajjwal, from PS Prem Nagar.
6.	Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties without any force, fear, coercion. She confirms having received the entire amount by draft/cash from petitioner No. 1 and has no objection if the FIR No. 444/2024 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. 444/2024 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. Hence, 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. 444/2024 dated 21.08.2024, registered at P.S Prem Nagar, District Rohini, Delhi under section 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
October 30, 2025
SK







CRL.M.C. 7619/2025                                                                                                                                             Page 1 of 4