CRL.M.C. 4876/2026 Page 1 of 5 $~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010299972026 + CRL.M.C. 4876/2026, CRL.M.A. 20421/2026 ASHUTOSH SINGH AND ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Rajeev Shukla, Mr. Shiv Lal Kannaujiya and Ms. Pranjali Chaudhary, Advocates with Petitioner. versus THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State with Mr. Abhimanyu Arya, Advocate. SI Abhimanyu, PS-Sonia Vihar. Mr. Durgesh Singh, Advocate for R-2 with R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 25.09.2026 1. This petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732) seeks quashing of FIR No. 0059/2021 dated 6th March, 2021, registered under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18603 at P.S. Sonia Vihar, and all other proceedings emanating therefrom. 2. Petitioner No. 1 is the husband of Respondent No. 2/Complainant, 1 “BNSS” 2 “Cr.P.C.” This is a digitally signed order. 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 30/09/2026 at 11:31:58 CRL.M.C. 4876/2026 Page 2 of 5 while Petitioner Nos. 2 to 12 are her in-laws and other relatives of Petitioner No. 1. Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 were married on 1st June, 2017 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies, and a daughter was born from this marriage on 7th December, 2018. Owing to matrimonial differences, disputes arose between the parties. Respondent No. 2 alleged that the Petitioners subjected her to cruelty and harassment in connection with demands for dowry and misappropriated her stridhan, leading to registration of the impugned FIR on her complaint. 3. The parties state that, during the pendency of the matrimonial proceedings, the parties were referred to the Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, where they amicably resolved their disputes and entered into a settlement dated 13th November, 2025, a copy whereof has been placed on record. Under the settlement, Petitioner No. 1 agreed to pay Respondent No. 2 a sum of INR 7,10,000/- towards full and final settlement of her claims. The parties also agreed to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent and, in furtherance thereof, a decree of divorce was passed on 6th March, 2026. It was also agreed that the custody of their minor daughter would remain with Respondent No. 2, while preserving the child’s independent right to seek appropriate relief in respect of her maintenance, education and upbringing in accordance with law. 4. Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and has been identified by the Investigating Officer. She confirms that the settlement was arrived at voluntarily, without any force, coercion or undue influence, and that she has received the entire settlement amount as well as the gold ring in terms thereof. She also confirms that the marriage between her and Petitioner No. 3 “IPC” This is a digitally signed order. 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 30/09/2026 at 11:31:58 CRL.M.C. 4876/2026 Page 3 of 5 1 has been dissolved by mutual consent by decree of divorce dated 6th March, 2026. She states that no grievance survives against the Petitioners and has no objection to quashing of the impugned FIR. An affidavit to this effect has also been placed on record. The Petitioners are also present in Court and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer. In light of the foregoing, counsel for the parties jointly pray for the quashing of the impugned FIR. 5. The Court has considered the afore-noted facts. Notably, the offence under Section 498A of IPC is non-compoundable, while the offence under Section 406 of IPC is compoundable in certain cases. 6. It is well settled that in the exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 BNSS), the Court may, in appropriate cases, quash proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences if the parties have reached a genuine settlement and no overarching public interest is adversely affected. In Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.,4 the Supreme Court held as follows: “29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings: 29.1. Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution. 4 (2014) 6 SCC 466 This is a digitally signed order. 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 30/09/2026 at 11:31:58 CRL.M.C. 4876/2026 Page 4 of 5 29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure: (i) ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives. 29.3. Such a power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for the offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. 29.4. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves. 29.5. While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases.” [Emphasis Supplied] 7. Considering the nature of dispute and the fact that the parties have amicably entered into a settlement, this Court is of the opinion that the present case is fit to exercise jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS as no purpose would be served by keeping the dispute alive and continuance of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court. 8. In view of the above, the impugned FIR No. 0059/2021 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. 9. For abundant caution, it is clarified that the settlement between the This is a digitally signed order. 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 30/09/2026 at 11:31:58 CRL.M.C. 4876/2026 Page 5 of 5 parties shall not affect the rights of their minor child, in view of the judgement of the Supreme Court in Ganesh v. Sudhi Kumar Shrivastava.5 10. The parties shall abide by the terms of settlement. 11. The present petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. SANJEEV NARULA, J SEPTEMBER 25, 2026/nk 5 (2020) 20 SCC 787. This is a digitally signed order. 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 30/09/2026 at 11:31:58