CRL.M.C./7007/2024 of GOPAL DASS CHAVLA Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of decision: 16.09.2025

,,,,,,,,,,+ CRL.M.C. 7007/2024 GOPAL DAS CHAVLA

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Naiem Jahan Heena, DHCLSC Mr. Raj Kumar Adv.

Heena,

versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

.....Respondents

Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP with SI Pankaj Kumar, PS Jyoti Nagar.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA JUDGMENT(ORAL)

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

1. This is petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 222/2014, dated 30.03.2014, registered at P.S Jyoti Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC & Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and all 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 09.07.2011 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies. One child was born out of the said wedlock. However, on account of

CRL.M.C. 7007/2024 Page 1 of 4

temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1and Respondent No. 2 are living separately since 29.03.2013.

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. FIR No. 222/2014 was lodged at instance of respondent no. 2 under sections 498A/406/34 IPC & section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against the petitioners. Chargesheet has since been filed.

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 an Agreement dated 27.10.2021. Pursuant to the aforesaid settlement, petitioner and respondent no. 2 have obtained divorce on 25.02.2022. It is submitted that Petitioner has paid the total settlement amount of Rs. 1,93,000/- (Rupees one Lac Ninety Three Thousand Only) along all dowry articles and gifts as per the schedule in settlement. It is further submitted that the child shall be in custody of respondent no. with no connection to petitioner. Copy of the Agreement dated 27.10.2021 has been annexed as Annexure 3(Colly).

5. Parties have entered their appearance through VC. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Pankaj Kumar, from PS Jyoti Nagar.

6. Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioner without any force, fear, coercion and she has

CRL.M.C. 7007/2024 Page 2 of 4

received the total settlement amount and has no objection if the FIR No. 222/2014 is quashed against the Petitioner.

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. 222/2014 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.

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

CRL.M.C. 7007/2024 Page 3 of 4

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. 222/2014, dated 30.03.2014, registered at P.S Jyoti Nagar, Delhi under section 498A/406/34 IPC & section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 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.

September 16, 2025 SK

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

CRL.M.C. 7007/2024 Page 4 of 4