Bharat Panchal & ANR. v. State NCT Of Delhi And ANR

$~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BHARAT PANCHAL & ANR.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr.Archit Upadhyay (DHCLSC) and Ms.Pragya Mishra, Advocates alongwith petitioners versus STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through:

Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State alongwith SI Rakhi, P.S.-Jyoti Nagar R-2 in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

O R D E R

% 15.09.2025 CRL.M.A. 4264/2025 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

1.

Petitioners herein seek quashing of an FIR No.533/2020 dated 23.11.2020 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Jyoti Nagar, along with all the proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise between the parties. 2.

Dispute between the parties arose mainly from the matrimonial discord between Petitioner no.

(Husband) and Respondent no.2/Complainant (Wife). The couple got married on 21.07.2018 according The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

to Hindu rites and ceremonies. They are living separately since 20.09.2018. No child is born from the wedlock.

2.1 The aforesaid FIR was also registered against the Mother of the Husband/Petitioner no.1 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have now amicably settled the matter. Respondent no.2 has executed an Affidavitcum-NOC in support of the quashing of the aforesaid FIR which is placed on record as Annexure 'P5'.

3.1 He further submits that pursuant to the settlement, marriage between the Petitioner No.1 and Respondent no.2 has already been dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 22.02.2023 by the competent Family Court. 3.2 Learned Counsel further submits that the Respondent no.2 does not thus wish to press charges and proceed further against the petitioners. 3.3 Learned Counsel lastly submits that, keeping in view that the parties have amicably settled their disputes and differences with respect to the present case, further continuation of the proceedings would be a futile exercise.

4.

Learned APP for the state, under instructions concur with the factum of compromise between the parties and the same has been duly verified, he informs.

5.

In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent no. 2, as well as, perused the material available on record.

6.

The parties are present in Court, and I have interacted with them. Upon a query put to Respondent No. 2/Complainant, she candidly submits that she has amicably resolved her differences with Petitioner no.1 and has The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

entered into the settlement out of her own free will, without any pressure, coercion, or undue influence from any quarter. She further states that pursuant to the settlement, Petitioner no.1 has complied with the terms of the settlement to her satisfaction and nothing remains payable to her. She also states that in view of the settlement, she does not wish to continue with the proceedings against the petitioners.

7.

Since the complainant does not wish to press charges against the petitioners and there is no incriminating material against them, coupled with the fact that the parties have amicably compromised the matter, further criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 8.

Given that the dispute has been resolved, continuing with criminal proceedings may serve no useful purpose. It would be a drain on judicial resources and abuse of the process of law, especially when dispute does not involve any public interest or interest of the society at large. Continuation of the proceedings, on the other hand, may result in hostility between the parties and defeat the very purpose of the settlement. 9.

Quashing the FIR would rather facilitate the parties in maintaining or restoring cordiality. Therefore, the proceedings deserve to be quashed in the exercise of the inherent powers of the Court. Reference may be had to the judgement rendered in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303] in this context.

10.

Accordingly, exercising the inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of BNSS, it is therefore deemed expedient to quash the FIR in question arising out of matrimonial dispute. 11.

Consequently, the instant petition is allowed. FIR No.533/2020 dated 23.11.2020 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

IPC, registered at Police Station Jyoti Nagar, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed. 12.

All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ARUN MONGA, J SEPTEMBER 15, 2025 dy The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.