Delhi High Court – Orders
Kamla Devi & Anr vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 7 April, 2026
Author: Prateek Jalan
Bench: Prateek Jalan
$~95
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2595/2026
KAMLA DEVI & ANR. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Prem Kishor Sharma & Ms.
Babita Sharma, Advocates.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State.
SI Shivpal Singh & ASI Jasveer
Singh, PS Punjabi Bagh.
Mr. Nikhil Kataria & Mr. Mohit
Tyagi, Advocates for R-2
alongwith R-2 in Person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
ORDER
% 07.04.2026
CRL.M.A. 10562/2026(Exemption)
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 2595/2026
1. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 528 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [“BNSS”] (corresponding
to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [“CrPC“])
seeking quashing of FIR No. 225/2023 dated 09.05.2023, registered at
Police Station Punjabi Bagh, District West, New Delhi, under Sections
498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [“IPC“], alongwith all
CRL.M.C. 2595/2026 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 09/04/2026 at 20:58:16
proceedings emanating therefrom, on the ground that the parties have
arrived at a settlement.
2. Issue notice. Ms. Manjeet Arya, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor, accepts notice on behalf of the State. Mr. Nikhil Kataria,
learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 2.
3. The petition is taken up for disposal with consent of learned
counsel of parties.
4. The present FIR has been registered at the instance of respondent
No. 2, who was the wife of petitioner No. 2. Petitioner No. 1 is the
mother of petitioner No. 2.
5. The marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was
solemnised on 17.05.2011, as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. On account
of matrimonial discord and differences of temperament, the parties have
been living separately since 2022. One female child was born from the
wedlock on 08.11.2014, whose custody remains with the petitioners.
6. Respondent No. 2 lodged a formal complaint before the Crime
Against Women Cell, Kirti Nagar, Delhi, on 03.06.2022, against the
petitioners alleging physical and mental cruelty and misappropriation of
stridhan, on the basis of which the subject FIR was registered on
09.05.2023. Upon completion of investigation, a chargesheet was filed on
22.05.2024.
7. During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties entered into a
settlement dated 23.07.2025 under the aegis of the Delhi Mediation
Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi. The settlement contemplates
payment of a total sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to respondent No. 2, towards full
and final settlement of all claims, of which Rs. 1,50,000 was to be paid at
CRL.M.C. 2595/2026 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 09/04/2026 at 20:58:16
the time of quashing of the subject FIR. The custody of the minor child
was to remain with the petitioners, with visitation rights granted to
respondent No. 2 once a month.
8. Pursuant to the settlement, the marriage between petitioner No. 2
and respondent No. 2 has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by
mutual consent, passed by the Family Court in HMA No. 243/2026 on
11.02.2026.
9. In light of the aforesaid, the parties seek quashing of the impugned
FIR and consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.
10. The petitioners are present in Court and are identified by their
learned counsel as well as by the Investigating Officer [“IO”].
Respondent No. 2 is also present in person and is identified by her
learned counsel and the IO.
11. Learned counsel for the parties confirm that the settlement has been
entered into voluntarily and without any coercion or undue pressure.
12. While the offence under Section 498A of the IPC is non-
compoundable, the Supreme Court has held that, in appropriate
circumstances, High Courts may exercise their powers under Section 528
of the BNSS (corresponding to Section 482 of the CrPC) to quash
criminal proceedings, even in relation to non-compoundable offences,
where a compromise has been reached between the accused and the
complainant, particularly when such quashing does not prejudice any
larger public interest.
13. The Supreme Court, in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.1 has
held as follows:
CRL.M.C. 2595/2026 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 09/04/2026 at 20:58:16
“58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard
to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been
settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its
opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in
futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the
parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of
justice being the ultimate guiding factor. No doubt, crimes are acts
which have harmful effect on the public and consist in wrongdoing that
seriously endangers and threatens the well-being of the society and it is
not safe to leave the crime-doer only because he and the victim have
settled the dispute amicably or that the victim has been paid
compensation, yet certain crimes have been made compoundable in law,
with or without the permission of the court. In respect of serious offences
like murder, rape, dacoity, etc., or other offences of mental depravity
under IPC or offences of moral turpitude under special statutes, like the
Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public
servants while working in that capacity, the settlement between the
offender and the victim can have no legal sanction at all. However,
certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil
flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial,
partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of
matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or the family dispute,
where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the
victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of
the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable, the
High Court may within the framework of its inherent power, quash the
criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that
on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the
offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal
proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be
defeated. The above list is illustrative and not exhaustive. Each case will
depend on its own facts and no hard-and-fast category can be
prescribed.”2Further, in Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.3, the
Supreme Court has also 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:
1
(2012) 10 SCC 303.
2
Emphasis supplied.
3
(2014) 6 SCC 466.
CRL.M.C. 2595/2026 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 09/04/2026 at 20:58:16
“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 the
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
CRL.M.C. 2595/2026 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 09/04/2026 at 20:58:16
quashing the criminal cases.”4
14. In the present case, the criminal proceedings arise out of a
matrimonial relationship that has already been dissolved by a decree of
divorce. Applying the principles laid down by the Supreme Court,
respondent No. 2 has unequivocally stated before this Court that the
Settlement was entered into voluntarily, without any coercion or undue
influence. In these circumstances, the continuation of the criminal
proceedings is unlikely to lead to a conviction and would merely serve as
a procedural formality, thereby imposing an unnecessary burden on the
justice system and diverting valuable judicial resources without serving
any meaningful purpose.
15. The settlement contemplates payment of Rs.5,00,000/- to be made
to respondent No. 2 by the petitioners. Respondent No. 2 confirms before
the Court that a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- has already been paid to her. The
balance amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- is handed over to respondent No. 2 in
Court today. There is, therefore, no impediment to the grant of the relief
sought.
16. In view of the foregoing, the petition is allowed, and FIR No.
225/2023 dated 09.05.2023, registered at Police Station Punjabi Bagh,
District West, New Delhi, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC,
alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is hereby
quashed.
17. The parties shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement.
18. It is, however, clarified that the settlement and the present order
4
Emphasis supplied.
CRL.M.C. 2595/2026 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 09/04/2026 at 20:58:16
shall not, in any manner, affect the rights of the minor child, whose
custody shall continue to remain with the petitioners.
19. The petition, alongwith the pending application, accordingly stands
disposed of.
PRATEEK JALAN, J
APRIL 7, 2026
‘pv/JM’/
CRL.M.C. 2595/2026 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 09/04/2026 at 20:58:16