Delhi High Court – Orders
Narayan Sundaram & Anr vs The State Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 3 March, 2025
Author: Chandra Dhari Singh
Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh
$~70
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 443/2025
NARAYAN SUNDARAM & ANR. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. H. S. Yadav and Mr. Saurabh
Yadav, Advocates along with
petitioners in person (Through VC)
versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP for the State
with Insp. Rita, P.S. CAW Cell,
Nanakpura
Respondent no. 2 in person (Through
VC)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
ORDER
% 03.03.2025
CRL.M.A. 2130/2025 (Exemption)
Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 443/2025
1. The instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter “BNSS”) [(earlier Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(hereinafter “Cr.P.C.”)] has been filed on
behalf of the petitioners praying for quashing of FIR bearing No. 191/2016
dated 20th October, 2016 registered at Police Station Crime Against Women
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/03/2025 at 21:19:45
Cell, Nanakpura, Delhi for offences punishable under Sections
406/498A/494/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC“).
2. The Joint Registrar (Judicial) vide order dated 13th February, 2025 has
verified the facts and details of the instant matter.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the petitioner
no. 1 and respondent no.2 got solemnized on 10th December, 1997 at Delhi
according to Hindu rites and ceremonies but due to some temperamental
differences between them, they started living separately since 20th April,
2008. One child was born out of their wedlock.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that despite several efforts
of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle the differences. The
respondent no.2 lodged a complaint with the CAW Cell, Nanakpura, Delhi
which led to the registration of the aforesaid FIR against the petitioners on
20th October, 2016.
5. It is submitted that with the intervention of family members and
relatives, the parties entered into settlement vide Memorandum of
Understanding dated 30th March, 2023 (hereinafter “MOU”). The terms and
conditions of the said settlement are mentioned in the MOU which is
annexed as Annexure P-2 to the instant petition.
6. On 11th August, 2023, the first motion under Section 13-B (1) of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter “HMA”) was allowed before learned
Principal Judge, South East, Family Courts, Saket, New Delhi and on 1st
February, 2024, the learned Principal Judge, South East, Family Courts,
Saket, New Delhi allowed the second motion and the parties were granted
decree of divorce under Section 13-B (2) of the HMA.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/03/2025 at 21:19:45
7. It is submitted that respondent no.2 has settled all her claims in
respect of her dowry articles, stridhan, marriage expenses, jewellery, gift
items and claims of past, present and future maintenance with the petitioners
for a sum of Rs. 13,00,000/- and all disputes of any nature whatsoever. It is
submitted that the respondent no. 2 has already received all the money as
per the terms of the MOU.
8. Therefore, it is prayed that the instant FIR may be quashed on the
basis of MOU and in accordance with the settled law on this point as posited
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
9. Learned APP for the State submitted that there is no objection to the
prayer made on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in
question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.
10. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
11. The petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified
by their counsel, Mr. H. S. Yadav, Advocate and Investigating Officer Insp.
Rita, Police Station CAW Cell, Nanakpura, Delhi. The respondent no. 2 is
also present in the Court through video conferencing and has been identified
by the Investigating Officer.
12. On the query made by this Court, respondent no.2 has categorically
stated that she has entered into compromise on her own free will and
without any pressure. It is also stated by respondent no.2 that the entire
dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and she does not wish
to pursue the aforesaid FIR anyfurther. The parties also undertook that they
shall abide the terms and conditions of the Settlement arrived at between the
parties.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/03/2025 at 21:19:45
13. The instant criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable
offences are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on the
society especially when there is a settlement/compromise between victim
and accused. In such cases, it is settled law that High Court is also required
to consider the conduct and antecedents of the accused in order to ascertain
that the settlement has been entered into by her own free will and has not
been imposed upon her by the petitioners or any person related to them.
14. In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and
Ors., (2019) 5 SCC 688, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the powers
conferred under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, can be exercised by the Courts to
quash the criminal proceedings featuring non-compoundable offences, when
the matter arises out of matrimonial or family disputes. Moreover, it is
pertinent to satisfy the Court that the said non-compoundable offences are
private in nature and does not have a serious impact on the society.
15. Furthermore, it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
case of Ramgopal and Ors. Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 INSC
568, that the extraordinary power enjoined upon the High Courts under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be invoked even when such a case falls within
the ambit of non-compoundable offences given that the Court must be
satisfied that the nature of the offence does not impact the conscience of the
society and that the compromise between the parties is voluntary and
amicable.
16. In the present case, the complainant/respondent no.2 is present in
Court and has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise and
has settled the entire disputes amicably with the petitioners by her own free
will without any pressure or coercion. There is also no allegation from
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/03/2025 at 21:19:45
respondent no.2 that the conduct and antecedents of petitioners have been
bad towards her after the compromise.
17. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law
laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the present petition is allowed.
Accordingly, FIR bearing No. 191/2016 dated 20th October, 2016 registered
at Police Station CAW Cell, Nanakpura, Delhi for offences punishable
under Sections 406/498A/494/34 of the IPC and all consequential
proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
18. The petition alongwith pending applications, if any, stand disposed
of.
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J
MARCH 3, 2025
gs/anr
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/03/2025 at 21:19:45