W.P.(CRL)/2659/2025 of JATIN KAPOOR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

$~95 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of decision: 25.08.2025

,,,,,,,,,,

+ W.P(CRL)2659/2025 & CRL.M.A. 25161/2025 EXEMPTION JATIN KAPOOR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Saurabh Jhamb, Ms. Aakriti Sharma & Mr. Tarun Shastri, Advs. along with petitioners in person. JATIN KAPOOR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Saurabh Jhamb, Ms. Aakriti Sharma & Mr. Tarun Shastri, Advs. along with petitioners in person.

versus

STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing counsel with Ms. Priyam Aggarwal, Mr. Abhinav Kumar Arya, Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advs. Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing counsel with Ms. Priyam Aggarwal, Mr. Abhinav Kumar Arya, Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advs.

SI Sumit, PS Jagat puri, ASI Shiv Kumar, PS Farsh Bajar. Mr. Avadhesh Kumar Tripathi, Advs. for R-2 along with R-2 in person. Shiv Kumar, PS Farsh Bajar. Mr. Avadhesh Kumar Tripathi, Advs. for R-2 along with R-2 in person.

CORAM:-

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

JUDGMENT(ORAL)

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

1. This is petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 51/2022, dated 08.07.2025, registered at P.S Jagatpuri, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all

W.P(CRL)2659/2025 Page 1 of 4

proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties.

2. The factual matrix giving rise to the instant case is that the marriage between Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent no. 2/complainant was solemnized on 24.06.2011 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies at Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Two children were born out of the said wedlock. However, on account of temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1and Respondent No. 2 started living separately.

3. 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. Chargesheet has since been filed under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners.

4. During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes and the terms of the compromise were reduced into writing in the form of Settlement Agreement dated 04.07.2025 before Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Centre. Pursuant to the aforesaid settlement, Petitioner no. 1 and Respondent No. 2 have resumed cohabitation along their children. It is submitted that Petitioner no. 2 has transferred property bearing no. 51, Upper Ground Floor, Gali no. 11, South Anarkali Extension, Jagat Puri, Delhi – 110051 jointly to petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2. It is further submitted that petitioner no. 1 has agreed to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 12,000/- to respondent no. 2 and undertakes to bear all expenses

W.P(CRL)2659/2025 Page 2 of 4

towards maintenance of respondent no. 2 and their children. Copy of the Agreement dated 04.07.2025 has been annexed as Annexure C.

5. Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Sumit, PS Jagat puri & ASI Shiv Kumar, PS Farsh Bajar.

6. Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners without any force, fear, coercion and she confirms that she has started residing together with petitioner no. 1 and has no objection if the FIR No. 51/2022 is quashed against the Petitioners. Petitioner no. 1 undertakes to pay Rs. 12,000/- as monthly maintenance to respondent no. 2 and agrees to bear all household exepnses.

7. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR No. 51/2022 is quashed.

8. Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicablesettlement 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.

W.P(CRL)2659/2025 Page 3 of 4

9. 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 quietus if the parties have reached an amicable settlement. Reliance may be placed upon B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC.

10. 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.

11. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No.

51/2022, dated 08.07.2025, registered at P.S Jagatpuri, Delhi under section 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

12. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

13. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

August 25, 2025

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

W.P(CRL)2659/2025 Page 4 of 4