Delhi High Court
Sh. Sachin Tomar vs State (Nct Of Delhi ) And Others on 3 July, 2025
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 03.07.2025
,,,,,,,,,,
+ CRL.M.C. 755/2025
SH. SACHIN TOMAR .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Parul Verma, Advocate.
Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 in
person.
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
AND OTHERS ... Respondents
Through: Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP.
SI Sachin Panwar, PS-Fatehpur
Beri, SI Devender, PS-Sangam
Vihar.
Respondent No. 2 in person.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
JUDGMENT(ORAL)
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
1. This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashing of FIR No. 0269/2021,
dated 05.06.2021, registered at P.S Fatehpur Beri under sections
498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the
basis of settlement between the parties.
2. The marriage between Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.2
was solemnized on 08.02.2018 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies at
CRL.M.C. 755/2025 Page 1 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VAISHALI PRUTHI
Signing Date:03.07.2025
17:49:13
Delhi. No child was born out of the said wedlock. It is submitted that
due to temperamental differences, the couple started living separately
since 06.10.2019. Thereafter, Respondent No.2 filed complaint under
section 12, 18, 19, 20 and 22 of DV Act and also lodged the aforesaid
FIR against Petitioner No.1 and his family members. The Petitioner
No.1 filed a petition under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act bearing
HMA no. 2440/2019.
3. During the proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their
disputes and executed a Settlement Deed dated 22.02.2024. In
pursuance of the Settlement, the parties jointly filed a fresh petition for
divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B(1) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955. The learned Family Court, Saket Courts allowed
the mutual divorce petition on 22.04.2024, thereby dissolving the
marriage between the Petitioner and Respondent No.2. It is submitted
that all the previous complaints and litigations initiated by the parties
has been withdrawn and all conditions of the Settlement Agreement
have been fulfilled including the payment of the total settlement
amount of Rs. 4,12,500/- (Rupees four lacs twelve thousand five
hundred rupees) and return of gold and silver ornaments as per the
schedule mentioned in the Settlement Deed. The copy of Settlement
Deed dated 22.02.2024 has been placed on record as Annexure P-2.
4. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 as also respondent No. 2 are physically –
present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective
CRL.M.C. 755/2025 Page 2 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VAISHALI PRUTHI
Signing Date:03.07.2025
17:49:13
counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Sachin Panwar,
from PS Fatehpur Beri and SI Devender from PS Sangam Vihar.
5. Respondent No.2 confirms that the matter has been settled with
the petitionerwithout any force, fear, coercion and she has received the
payment of the entire settlement amount of Rs. 4,12,500/- (Rupees
four lacs twelve thousand five hundred rupees) as also her gold and
silver ornaments from the Petitioner No.1 as per the schedule
mentioned in the Settlement Deed. She further submits that she has no
objection if the FIR No. 0269/2021 is quashed against the petitioners.
6. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned
Additional PP appearing for the State, also has no objection if the
present FIR No. 0269/2021 is quashed.
7. In Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon’ble
Supreme Courthas recognized the need of amicable resolution of
disputes by observing as under:-
“61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would
be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the
criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings
would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and
compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to
secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put
to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the
affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to
quash the criminal proceedings.”
CRL.M.C. 755/2025 Page 3 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VAISHALI PRUTHI
Signing Date:03.07.2025
17:49:13
8. In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the fact that parties
have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in
continuing with the present FIR No. 0269/2021, dated 05.06.2021,
registered at P.S Fatehpur Beri under sections 498A/406/34 IPC and
all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom.
9. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and FIR No.
0269/2021, dated 05.06.2021, registered at P.S Fatehpur Beri under
sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all the other consequential proceeding
emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.
10. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
11. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
JULY 03, 2025
AK
CRL.M.C. 755/2025 Page 4 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VAISHALI PRUTHI
Signing Date:03.07.2025
17:49:13