$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 06th October, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC010404662026 + CRL.M.C. 6368/2026 SUJEET VERMA AND ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Amit Kumar and Ms. Meenu, Advs. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP for State SI Ashish Sharma PS Nand Nagri. Ms. Seema Mishra, Mr. Harish Sharma, Ms. Anju R Mishra and Mr. Ifra, Advocates for respondent no. 2 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (Oral): 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), seeking quashing of the First Information Report (“FIR”), being FIR No. 673/2024, dated 15th October, 2024, registered at Police Station (“PS”) Nand Nagri, North-East, Delhi, under Sections 85/316/351/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”), and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, on the ground of settlement between the parties. 2. Issue Notice. 3. Notice is accepted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:08.10.2026 19:48:35 Signature Not Verified (“APP”) for the State as well as by learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2. 4. The parties, i.e., the petitioners as well as respondent no. 2 are present before this Court, and are duly identified by their respective counsels as well as the Investigating Officer (“IO”), who is also present before this Court. 5. The captioned petition is taken up for disposal with the consent of the parties. 6. The relevant facts for the adjudication of the captioned petition, culled out from the documents on record, are as follows: 6.1 The marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 was solemnised on 09th May, 2021. However, owing to matrimonial discord, petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 have been residing separately from 12th March, 2022. Furthermore, no issue has been born out of the said wedlock. 6.2 The FIR in question came to be lodged on 15th October, 2024, pursuant to a written complaint by respondent no. 2, i.e., the complainant, to the Crime Against Women (“CAW”) Cell, Nand Nagri, Delhi, alleging that the petitioner no. 1 hatched a conspiracy along with the other petitioners herein and harassed her mentally and physically qua unlawful demands for dowry and also threatened to kill her. She further alleges that despite repeated reconciliation efforts, the petitioners refused to take her back and resume the matrimonial relationship. 6.3 During the pendency of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved all their disputes vide Mediation Settlement dated 07th May, 2026, arrived at between the parties before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. 6.4 By way of the said Mediation Settlement, petitioner no. 1 and Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:08.10.2026 19:48:35 Signature Not Verified respondent no. 2 agreed to dissolve their marriage by way of divorce by mutual consent. Furthermore, the parties had agreed to a full and final settlement of Rs. 3,50,000/-, which was to be paid by petitioner no.1 to respondent no. 2. 6.5 Vide the said Mediation Settlement the parties agreed to cooperate with each other in quashing of the FIR in question. 7. Learned counsels appearing for the petitioners as well as respondent no. 2 jointly submit that the parties have executed the Mediation Settlement dated 07th May, 2026, and therefore, pray that the FIR in the question be quashed. 8. Further, as per the terms of the said Meditation Settlement, the parties agreed to payment of a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- by petitioner no. 1 to respondent no. 2 as full and final settlement qua all maintenance, alimony, jewellery, etc. 9. This Court is informed that a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- has already been paid to respondent no. 2, and a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- is due and payable. 10. A Demand Draft of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been handed over by the petitioners to respondent no. 2, before this Court, which has been duly been accepted. 11. This Court has interacted with respondent no. 2, who submits that she has settled the matter with the petitioners and does not wish to pursue the matter any further. 12. This Court is informed that marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 already stands dissolved, as they have obtained a decree of divorce by mutual consent dated 06th July, 2026, granted by the Family Court–02, Shahdara District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, in HMA Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:08.10.2026 19:48:35 Signature Not Verified 1344/2026. 13. In light of the aforesaid, the parties seek quashing of the FIR in question. 14. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, he has no objection in respect to present petition. 15. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties, this Court notes that the present matter has been finally settled between the parties. 16. It is no longer res-integra that this Court has the power to quash the criminal proceedings in cases of non-compoundable offences under the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (“CrPC”), i.e., now the BNSS, wherein, the parties have settled the matter between themselves. 17. The Supreme Court has held that under Section 528 of the BNSS, High Courts may quash criminal proceedings, even with respect to non- compoundable offences, if the concerned parties have arrived at a compromise or settlement, and particularly when no overarching public interest is adversely affected by quashing the same. 18. In Jitendra Raghuvanshi and Others Versus Babita Raghuvanshi and Another, (2013) 4 SCC 58, the Supreme Court has held that the High Courts are empowered to quash an FIR in case of matrimonial disputes in order to foster genuine settlements, even when the offences involved are non-compoundable in nature. The relevant portion of the said judgment reads as under: “xxx xxx xxx 14. The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are wide and unfettered. In B.S. Joshi [(2003) 4 SCC 675 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 848] , this Court has upheld the Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:08.10.2026 19:48:35 Signature Not Verified powers of the High Court under Section 482 to quash criminal proceedings where dispute is of a private nature and a compromise is entered into between the parties who are willing to settle their differences amicably. We are satisfied that the said decision is directly applicable to the case on hand and the High Court ought to have quashed the criminal proceedings by accepting the settlement arrived at. 15. In our view, it is the duty of the courts to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes, particularly, when the same are on considerable increase. Even if the offences are non-compoundable, if they relate to matrimonial disputes and the Court is satisfied that the parties have settled the same amicably and without any pressure, we hold that for the purpose of securing ends of justice, Section 320 of the Code would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing of FIR, complaint or the subsequent criminal proceedings. xxx xxx xxx” (Emphasis Supplied) 19. Accordingly, considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, FIR No. 673/2024, dated 15th October, 2024, registered at PS Nand Nagri, North-East, Delhi, under Sections 85/316/351/3(5) of the BNS, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed. 20. The present petition is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms. MINI PUSHKARNA, J OCTOBER 6, 2026 ak By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:08.10.2026 19:48:35