Tanya Arjun v. The State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

$~91 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 6366/2025 and CRL.M.A. 26905/2025 & CRL.M.A. 26906/2025 TANYA ARJUN .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Bharat Monga and Mr. Aditya Dhingra, Advocates with petitioner in person.

versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Ms. Richa Dhawan, APP for the State with SI Pramod Kumar, DIW/SD.

Ms. Geeta Luthra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aadarsh Kothari, Advocate for respondent no. 2 with respondent no. 2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

O R D E R

% 09.09.2025 1.

The petitioner herein seeks quashing of an FIR No. 36/2024 dated 04.02.2024 for the alleged offences under Sections 379 and 380 of IPC, registered at Police Station Defence Colony, along with all the proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of a compromise between the parties, as well as the quashing of order dated 31.01.2024 passed by Ld.ASJ, Saket Courts in Crl. Revision No.287 of 2023. Respondent No. 2 initially filed a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C., which was dismissed. However, in Criminal Revision No. 287/2023, the Learned ASJ, Saket Courts vide order dated 31.01.2024 allowed the revision petition and directed the registration of the aforesaid FIR.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

2.

Briefly stated, the complainant's case is that her daughter-in-law (the Petitioner) allegedly re-entered the matrimonial home without consent and unlawfully retained possession of her vehicle, despite being provided with alternative accommodation.

3.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the petitioner, aggrieved by the Revision Court order also filed Crl. M.C. No. 977 of 2024. However, during the pendency of the proceedings the parties amicably resolved all their disputes with a view to preserve cordial relations and maintain harmony and executed settlement deed dated 24.05.2025. He further submits Respondent no.2 also has no subsisting grievance and does not object to quashing the FIR.

4.

Parties are present in court. Respondent No.2/Complainant has joined in person through video conference and has been identified by her counsel. On a query put to her, she states that she has arrived at a settlement on her own volition without any duress or coercion. In view thereof, she does not wish to press any charges against the petitioner. 5.

The Learned APP for the state and the learned counsel for the respondent/ complainant concur with the fact of compromise between the parties and submit that in view thereof, they have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

6.

In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and Respondent No.2, as well as the Learned APP for the state, and perused the FIR and case file.

7.

Given that the dispute has been resolved, continuing with criminal proceedings may serve no useful purpose. It would be a drain on judicial The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

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. 8.

Quashing the FIR would rather facilitate the parties in maintaining or restoring cordiality.

9.

Having heard, even otherwise, it is debatable whether the ingredients of the alleged offence, as per the penal sections invoked in the FIR are made out.

10.

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.

11.

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

12.

Consequently, the present petition is allowed. FIR No. 36/2024 dated 04.02.2024 registered at Police Station Defence Colony, for the offence punishable under Sections 379 and 380 of the IPC, and proceedings emanating there from, against the petitioners, are hereby quashed. 13.

All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ARUN MONGA, J SEPTEMBER 9, 2025/kd The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.