Delhi High Court – Orders
Sh. Manish Kandpal & Ors vs State Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 28 March, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~51
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 278/2025
SH. MANISH KANDPAL & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Bahar U. Barqi, Advocate.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, APP for
State.
Mr. Rohit Rexwal, Advocate for the
complainant.
Ms. Sangita Pokhriyal, complainant
in person through VC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 28.03.2025
CRL.M.A. 2428/2025 (Exemption)
1. Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The Applicant shall file legible and clearer copies of exempted
documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.
3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.A. 2429/2025 (Exemption from filing affidavit of Respondent No. 2)
4. Exemption is granted. Subject to all just exceptions.
5. The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(CRL) 278/2025 Page 1 of 7
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 02/04/2025 at 21:57:58
W.P.(CRL) 278/2025 and CRL.M.A. 2427/2025 (Stay)
6. The present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
20231 (formerly Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732)
seeks quashing of FIR No. 405/2020 registered under Sections 498A/406/34
of the Indian Penal Code, 18603 at P.S. Vasant Kunj North and all other
proceedings emanating therefrom.
7. Petitioner No. 1 is the husband of Respondent No. 2. Petitioners No. 2
to 4 are the in-laws of Respondent No. 2. The marriage between Petitioner
No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 was solemnized on 10th March, 2015 as per
Hindu rites and ceremonies. No child was born from the said marriage.
However, due to matrimonial discord, the relationship between the parties
deteriorated. Several efforts for reconciliation were made but to no avail.
8. Subsequently, Respondent No.2 made a complaint against Petitioners,
alleging that she was subjected to cruelty by them, which later culminated
into the impugned FIR.
9. The present petition is filed on the ground that the matter is amicably
settled between the parties on their own free will, without any coercion,
pressure or undue through mediation as recorded before the Delhi Mediation
Centre, Dwarka Courts on 6th June, 2024 and a Settlement Deed dated 28th
September, 2024 has been executed by Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No.
2. As per the terms of the settlement, Respondent No. 2 has agreed to co-
operate for quashing the present FIR. Pursuant to the settlement, Petitioner
1
“BNSS”
2
“Cr.P.C.”
3
“IPC”
W.P.(CRL) 278/2025 Page 2 of 7
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 02/04/2025 at 21:57:58
No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 have obtained a decree of divorce by mutual
consent through order dated 1st October, 2024 passed by the Family Courts,
District South, Saket Courts, New Delhi.
10. On 6th March, 2025, the statement of Respondent No. 2 was recorded
before the Joint Registrar and after verification of all critical aspects, the
Joint Registrar passed the following order:
” Today, statement of respondent no. 2 has been recorded to
ascertain the veracity and the genuineness of the parties entering into
settlement.
Respondent no. 2 lodged FIR No. 405/2020, Under Section 498-
A/406/34 IPG, registered at PS Vasant Kunj, Delhi and charge sheet has
been filed against the petitioners.
Respondent no. 2 states that she has voluntarily and without any
pressure or coercion after obtaining due legal advice entered into
compromise with the petitioners before Mediation Cell, Dwarka Courts,
Delhi, Vide Settlement dated 06.06.2024 which is on record as Annexure –
P-3 at page 83 onwards bearing her signatures.
Respondent no. 2 has settled all her issues, disputes and grievances
with the petitioner without any monetary or any other consideration.
Respondent no. 2 has no objections, if the FIR No. 405/2020, Under
Section 498-A/406/34 IPG, registered at PS Vasant Kunj, Delhi and all
proceedings emanating there from is quashed against the petitioners.
Respondent no. 2 states that she undertakes to withdraw all other cases
instituted by her against the petitioners, if any remaining.
As per the terms of the settlement. Respondent no. 2 shall not file
any other case in future regarding the claim of my stridhan or towards her
alimony or maintenance past, present and future whatsoever by way of any
litigation. There is no child born out of the wedlock.
Respondent no. 2 has already obtained divorce from petitioner no.
1 in HMA No. 2809/2024. The divorce decree dated 01.10.2024 is on
record as Annexure P-6 at page 107 onwards. Now Respondent no. 2 has
no objection whatsoever if the present FIR against the petitioner is
quashed and Respondent no. 2 shall fully cooperate in quashing of the
present FIR and raise no claim in future through any civil or criminal
litigation with regards to the incident relating to the present FIR.
W.P.(CRL) 278/2025 Page 3 of 7
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 02/04/2025 at 21:57:59
Respondent no. 2 has been identified by her counsel.
This pre verified report along with the petition may be placed
before the Hon’ble Court on 28th March, 2025 alongwith the statements
recorded today.”
11. In light of the foregoing, counsel for the parties jointly prayed for the
quashing of the impugned FIR.
12. The Court has considered the afore-noted facts. Notably, offence
under Sections 498A of IPC is non-compoundable while offence under
Section 406 of IPC is compoundable in certain cases.
13. It is well-established that the High Courts, in exercise of their powers
under Section 582 of BNSS (formerly 482 of Cr.P.C.), can compound
offences which are non-compoundable on the ground that there is a
compromise between the accused and the complainant. In Narinder Singh
& Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.,4 the Supreme Court laid down guidelines
for High Courts while accepting settlement deeds between parties and
quashing the proceedings. The relevant observations in the said decision
read as under:
“29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the
following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving
adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its
power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and
quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with
direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:
29.1. Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be
distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the
offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of
the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal
proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the4
(2014) 6 SCC 466W.P.(CRL) 278/2025 Page 4 of 7
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 02/04/2025 at 21:57:59
parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is
to be exercised sparingly and with caution.
29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis
petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor
in such cases would be to secure:
(i) ends of justice, or
(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court.
While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on
either of the aforesaid two objectives.
29.3. Such a power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which
involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like
murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and
have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for the offences alleged to
have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of
Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while
working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of
compromise between the victim and the offender.
29.4. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and
predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of
commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or
family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their
entire disputes among themselves.
29.5. While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to
whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation
of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice
and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal
cases.”
[Emphasis Supplied]
14. Similarly, in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir & Ors. v. State of Gujarat
& Anr.,5 the Supreme Court had observed as under:
“16. The broad principles which emerge from the precedents on the
subject, may be summarised in the following propositions:
16.1. Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to
5
(2017) 9 SCC 641W.P.(CRL) 278/2025 Page 5 of 7
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 02/04/2025 at 21:57:59
prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of
justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and
preserves powers which inhere in the High Court.
16.2. The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a first
information report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a
settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not
the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding
an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is
governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even
if the offence is non-compoundable.
16.3. In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or complaint
should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the
High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the
exercise of the inherent power.
16.4. While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and
plenitude it has to be exercised (i) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to
prevent an abuse of the process of any court.
16.5. The decision as to whether a complaint or first information report
should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled
the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each
case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulated.
16.6. In the exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing
with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have
due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious
offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape
and dacoity cannot appropriately be quashed though the victim or the
family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly
speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society.
The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the
overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious
offences.
16.7. As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases
which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute.
They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent
power to quash is concerned.
16.8. Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial,
financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an
W.P.(CRL) 278/2025 Page 6 of 7
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 02/04/2025 at 21:57:59
essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing
where parties have settled the dispute.
16.9. In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if
in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a
conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would
cause oppression and prejudice; and
16.10. There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions
16.8. and 16.9. above. Economic offences involving the financial and
economic well-being of the State have implications which lie beyond the
domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court
would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in
an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanour. The
consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic
system will weigh in the balance.”
[Emphasis Supplied]
15. Considering the nature of dispute and the fact that the parties have
amicably entered into a settlement, this Court is of the opinion that the
present case is fit to exercise jurisdiction under Section 582 of BNSS as no
purpose would be served by keeping the dispute alive and continuance of the
proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court.
16. In view of the above, the impugned FIR No. 405/2020 and all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
17. The present petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
SANJEEV NARULA, J
MARCH 28, 2025/PB
W.P.(CRL) 278/2025 Page 7 of 7
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 02/04/2025 at 21:57:59
[ad_1]
Source link