Dharampal Anand & ORS. v. State (NCT Of Delhi) & ANR.
$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + DHARAMPAL ANAND & ORS.
.....Petitioners Through:
Mr.
Udaibir Singh Kochar, Ms.Samvartika Pathak and Ms. Nikita Gupta, Advocates with petitioners in person.
versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP for the State with SI Vijay Pal Singh, PS - CWC, Nanakpura.
Respondent no. 2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
O R D E R
% 11.09.2025 1.
Petitioners herein seek quashing of an FIR No. 009/2024 dated 07.03.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Crime (Women) Cell, Nank Pura, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise between the parties.
2.
Briefly speaking, prior to the matrimonial disputes between Respondent no. 2 (the wife) and her husband (Rajesh Anand) who is not a party to the present petition, petitioner no. 1 (the husband's father) had instituted a suit for possession in respect of the property where respondent The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
no. 2 and Rajesh Anand reside, claiming himself to be the absolute owner of the aforesaid property. The couple got married on 8.11.1997, and three children are born from the wedlock.
3.
Thereafter, persuant to certian matrimonial disputes between the couple, the aforesaid FIR got registered against the sons (petitioner nos. 2 to
4) of Petitioner no. 1.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have now amicably settled their dispute vide Settlement Deed dated 29.08.2025, appended as Annexure-P-8. Learned counsel further submits that the affidavit to the effect of no objection to quashing deposed by respondent no.2/ complainant is also placed on record.
4.1 He would further submit that the petitioners have not been named in the present FIR and considering that the parties have amicably settled all their differences, and pursuant to the settlement, petitioner no. 1 has withdrawn the civil suit, further proceedings against the petitioners deserve to be quashed.
5.
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.
6.
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.
7.
Parties are present in Court and I have interacted with the complainant. Upon a query put to respondent no.2, she candidly states that she has entered into the settlement out of her free volition, without any The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
duress or coercion. She states that she does not wish to press any charges against the petitioners having amicably settled the dispute. 8.
Having heard, the dispute appears to be a purely family matter involving civil dispute with no involvement of public or societal interest. Since the complainant (wife) does not wish to press charges and there is no incriminating evidence against the petitioners, coupled with the fact that a compromise has been reached, continuing with the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility, amounting to an abuse of the legal process. Furthermore, it would place an unnecessary burden on the judicial system and lead to the wasteful expenditure of public resources by the prosecution. 9.
The trial would thus serve no fruitful purpose and further proceedings would rather result in hostility between the parties, defeating the very purpose of their settlement. In view thereof, the proceedings deserve to be quashed in exercise of the inherent powers of the Court. Reference in this context may also be made to judgment rendered in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. 10.
Accordingly, in the larger interest of justice, invoking inherent powers vested with this Court under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 the FIR No. 009/2024 dated 07.03.2024 lodged under Sections 498A, 406, 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Crime (Women) Cell, Nank Pura and all other proceedings arising there from are quashed qua the petitioners. 11.
All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ARUN MONGA, J SEPTEMBER 11, 2025/kd The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.