Ravinder Dudeja, J
CRL.M.A. 33622/2025 (for directions)
1. This is an application, filed on behalf of respondent No. 2, seeking appropriate directions pursuant to settlement dated 30.07.2025, entered into between petitioner No. 2 and respondent No. 2
2. It is submitted that during the pendency of proceedings, all the matrimonial disputes between the parties have been settled vide settlement agreement dated 30.07.2025 before “Samadhan”, Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre and petitioner No. 2 and respondent No. 2 have agreed to dissolve their marriage by way of mutual consent.
3. It has been submitted that the first motion petition has already been allowed on 18.08.2025 and second motion petition has been filed on 07.11.2025 before learned Principal Judge, Family Courts, Tis Hazari District, and is presently pending.
4. It is further submitted that as per clause 2(e) of the Settlement Agreement, it has been agreed that prior to the second motion, respondent No. 2 shall appear before this Court and execute all the documents, including the No Objection Certificate [“NOC”] and an affidavit in favour of petitioners to facilitate joint quashing of FIR and proceedings emanating therefrom.
5. Respondent No. 2 submits that in pursuance of the said Agreement, she has duly filed her NOC/affidavit, expressing her no objection to the quashing of FIR and proceedings emanating therefrom.
6. The factual matrix giving rise to the instant case is that marriage between petitioner No. 2 and respondent No. 2 was solemnized on 06.04.1997 as per Sikh Rites and ceremonies. Two children were born out of the said wedlock. However, on account of temperamental differences Petitioner No. 2 and Respondent No. 2 have been living separately for more than 5 years.
7. 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. Accordingly, at her instance, FIR No. 129/2021 was lodged at PS Kirti Nagar under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners. Chargesheet has since been filed.
8. During the course of proceedings of the present petition, the parties were referred to mediation, where they have entered into a Settlement Agreement dated 30.07.2025. As admitted by respondent No. 2, out of agreed settlement amount of Rs. 4 Crores (Rupees Four crores Only), she has received a sum of Rs. 75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lacs only), at the time of recording of statements of parties in first motion proceedings. The balance amount of Rs. 3,25,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crore Twenty Five Lakh), as per the Settlement Agreement, is to be paid at the time of the second motion. Petitioner No. 2 undertakes to make the payment of balance amount of Rs. 3,25,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crore Twenty Five Lakh) at the time of second motion. A copy of the Settlement Agreement dated 30.07.2025 has been annexed as Annexure A of the application bearing No. CRL. MA. No. 33622/2025.
9. Petitioner No. 2 and respondent No. 2 are physically present before the Court. Petitioner No. 1 is stated to be unwell, and therefore, not in a position to appear. The parties present in court have been identified by their respective counsels and the Investigating Officer WSI Aarushi Rajput, who is present in Court.
10. Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties without any force, fear, coercion and she has already received the settlement amount of Rs. 75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lacs only) and has no objection if the FIR No. 129/2023 is quashed against the petitioners.
11. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 129/2023 is quashed.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 129/2023, dated 07.06.2023, registered at P.S Kirti Nagar, Delhi under section 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.
16. Petition bearing Crl. MC No. 5916/2024 is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
17. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
18. The date already fixed i.e. 27.11.2025, shall stand cancelled.
