Lalita Goyal & Ors. v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 11 Nov 2025 · 2025:DHC:9833
Ravinder Dudeja
CRL.M.C. 7952/2025
2025:DHC:9833
criminal petition_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 498A IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in matrimonial disputes.

Full Text
Translation output
CRL.M.C. 7952/2025
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 11.11.2025 ,,,,,,,,,, CRL.M.C. 7952/2025
LALITA GOYAL & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Nitin Sharma, Mr. Ankit, Advs. along
WITH
petitioners in person.
VERSUS
STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP
WITH
SI Sonal Raj, PS Bharat
Nagar.
Mr. Arvind Kumar, Ms. Sneha Upadhayay, 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 a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No.263/2021, dated28.05.2021, registered at P.S Bharat Nagar, New Delhi under Sections 498A/34 IPC 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 the elder son of the petitioner No. l namely Sh. Prince Goyal was married to the respondent no.2 on 14.02.2009 and from the said wedlock, one male child was born who is presently in the care and custody of the respondent no.2. However, after the death of Sh. Prince Goyal some disputes have arisen between the family which led to filing of the FIR at PS Bharat Nagar

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. 263/2021 was lodged at the instance of respondent no. 2 at PS Bharat Nagar under sections 498A/34 IPC against the petitioners. Chargesheet has been filed U/s 498A/506/34 IPC.

4. During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes, the terms of settlement were written in the form of Settlement/Compromise Deed dated 27.01.2025. It is submitted that petitioner no. 1 has paid Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lacs only) out of settlement of Rs, 6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lacs Only), LIC Policies and Bank deposits and all her jewellery articles to respondent no. 2 and Respondent No.2 has handed over the vacant possession and keys of shop bearing No. 10185, Katra Chajju Pandit, East Park Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 to Petitioner No.1 as per the schedule in the settlement. Copy of the Settlement Deed dated 27.01.2025 has been annexed as Annexure P-3. It is submitted that balance amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs Only) shall be paid at the time of quashing of FIR No. 306/2020 U/s 354A/354B/511 IPC PS- D.G.B Road.

5. Parties are physically present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Sonal Raj, PS Bharat Nagar.

6. Respondent No. 2 confirms that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners without any force, fear, coercion and she has received Rs. 4,00,000/- along with the jewellery articles and has no objection if the FIR No. 263/2021 is quashed against the Petitioners.

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. 263/2021 is quashed.

8. Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable settlement 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 a 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 above mentioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

11. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR NO. 263/2021, dated 28.05.2021, registered at P.S Bharat Nagar, Delhi under section 498A/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.