CRL.M.C. 7300/2026 Page 1 of 5 $~72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010468632026 + CRL.M.C. 7300/2026 & CRL.M.A. 30557/2026 MUKUL ARORA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sarthak Gupta, Mr. Bhavya, Mr. Ankit Sisodia, Ms. Atti Tyagi, Advocates with Petitioner in person. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State with SI Mohit Kumar, PS Tilak Nagar. Respondent No. 2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 29.09.2026 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. 198/2021 dated 24th March, 2021, registered under Sections 498A, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18603 at P.S. Tilak Nagar, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom. 2. The Petitioner was married to Respondent No. 2/Complainant on 28th 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 05/10/2026 at 10:22:03 CRL.M.C. 7300/2026 Page 2 of 5 April, 2017 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. One child was born from the said marriage. Owing to matrimonial discord, differences arose between the parties and Respondent No. 2 lodged a complaint against the Petitioner and her parents-in-law, alleging that she was subjected to cruelty, which culminated in registration of the impugned FIR. 3. The Petitioner’s father, Satyapal Arora, expired on 22nd October, 2022, and proceedings against him were abated vide order dated 21st July, 2023. The Petitioner’s mother, Mohini Arora, was discharged from the proceedings vide order dated 18th September, 2023, as the allegations against her were found to be general, omnibus and trivial. 4. Counsel for the parties state that the parties have amicably resolved all their disputes and differences before the Counselling Cell, Family Court- 02, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and have executed a Settlement Deed dated 01st July, 2025, whereby the Petitioner has agreed to pay a total sum of INR 5,00,000/- to Respondent No. 2 as full and final settlement. As per the terms of the settlement, the parties have agreed to withdraw the proceedings instituted by them against each other. It has further been agreed that the custody of the child shall remain with Respondent No. 2 and that the Petitioner shall have no visitation rights. Pursuant to the settlement, the Petitioner and Respondent No. 2 have obtained a decree of divorce by mutual consent vide order dated 24th November, 2025 passed by the Judge, Family Court-02 (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. 5. 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. She confirms that in terms of the Settlement Deed, she has already received a sum of INR 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 05/10/2026 at 10:22:03 CRL.M.C. 7300/2026 Page 3 of 5 3,50,000/-. Additionally, in accordance with the Settlement, the Petitioner has tendered the balance amount by way of a demand draft for an amount of INR 1,50,000/- to Respondent No. 2 during the proceedings. The same has been duly received and acknowledged by Respondent No. 2. In light of the foregoing, counsel for the parties jointly pray for the quashing of the impugned FIR. 6. 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 with the permission of the Court. 7. 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 quash criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences where the parties have amicably settled their disputes. 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. 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 05/10/2026 at 10:22:03 CRL.M.C. 7300/2026 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] 8. 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. 9. In view of the above, the impugned FIR No. 198/2021 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. 10. The parties shall abide by the terms of settlement. 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 05/10/2026 at 10:22:03 CRL.M.C. 7300/2026 Page 5 of 5 11. For abundant caution, it is clarified that the settlement between the parties shall not affect the rights of the minor child, in view of the judgement of the Supreme Court in Ganesh v. Sudhi Kumar Shrivastava.5 12. The present petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. SANJEEV NARULA, J SEPTEMBER 29, 2026/ab 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 05/10/2026 at 10:22:03