CRL.M.C. 7149/2026 Page 1 of 5 $~89 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010458022026 + CRL.M.C. 7149/2026 & CRL.M.A. 29874/2026 HARISH KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Sonia Arora, Advocate with Petitioner (in-Person). versus STATE (GOVT. OFNCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP with Mr. Abhimanyu Arya, Advocate for State. PSI Seema, Ghazipur with Respondent No. 2 (in-Person). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 24.09.2026 1. The present petition filed 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. 801/2015 dated 18th August, 2015, registered under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18603 at P.S. Ghazipur and all other proceedings emanating therefrom. 2. Petitioner is the husband of Respondent No. 2. The marriage between Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 was solemnised on 20th April, 2008, as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. There are two children from the said 1 “BNSS” 2 “Cr.P.C.” 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 01/10/2026 at 11:18:34 CRL.M.C. 7149/2026 Page 2 of 5 marriage. Due to matrimonial discord, the relationship between the parties deteriorated, and the parties have been living separately since 3rd October, 2014. 3. Respondent No. 2 thereafter lodged a complaint before the Crime Against Women Cell, East District, Delhi, against the Petitioner, which culminated in registration of the FIR No. 801/2015 under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC at P.S. Ghazipur, Delhi. Investigation was completed, and the chargesheet was filed. Charges were framed against the Petitioner under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC, while all other accused were discharged by the Trial Court vide order dated 28th February, 2023. The revision petition preferred against the said order was dismissed by the ASJ, East District, Karkardooma Courts, vide order dated 12th March, 2024. The proceedings arising out of the aforementioned FIR are pending adjudication before the Trial Court. 4. The present petition is filed on the ground that Petitioner and Respondent No. 2 have amicably settled their disputes with the assistance of their parents, elder relatives and family members. In terms of the Settlement Deed dated 19th July, 2026, the parties have decided to reside together and bring an end to all pending litigation between them. 5. In light of the foregoing, counsel for the parties jointly pray for the quashing of the impugned FIR. Respondent No. 2, who appears before the Court in person and is duly identified by the Investigating Officer, confirms the settlement and gives her no objection to the quashing of the impugned FIR. 6. The Court has interacted with the complainant. She states that she has been living with her husband for the last one month and that the parties have 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 01/10/2026 at 11:18:34 CRL.M.C. 7149/2026 Page 3 of 5 resolved their disputes and differences. She further states that there is no surviving grievance or complaint on her part, that the matrimonial relationship is presently cordial, and that she does not wish to pursue the present proceedings any further. 7. 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. 8. It is well-established that the High Courts, in exercise of their powers under Section 528 of BNSS (corresponding to Section 482 of CrPC), can compound offences which are non-compoundable on the ground that there is a compromise between the accused and the complainant. In Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.,4 the Supreme Court laid down guidelines for High Courts while accepting settlement deeds between parties and quashing the proceedings. The relevant observations in the said decision read as under: “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. 29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor 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 01/10/2026 at 11:18:34 CRL.M.C. 7149/2026 Page 4 of 5 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] 9. In the present case, the dispute arises out of a matrimonial relationship between the Petitioner and Respondent No. 2. The parties have amicably resolved their disputes with the intervention of their family members and have decided to reside together and bring an end to all pending litigation. Respondent No. 2 has categorically stated that she does not wish to pursue the impugned FIR and has no objection to its quashing. In these circumstances, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. 10. Considering the nature of the dispute and the settlement arrived at 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 01/10/2026 at 11:18:34 CRL.M.C. 7149/2026 Page 5 of 5 between the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the present case is fit for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS. 11. In view of the above, the impugned FIR No. 801/2015 registered at P.S. Ghazipur and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. 12. Parties shall abide by the terms of the settlement. 13. The present petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Pending application also stands disposed of. SANJEEV NARULA, J SEPTEMBER 24, 2026 as 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 01/10/2026 at 11:18:34