Delhi High Court · 2025-09-19
CHINTU KUMAR & ORS. vs STATE GOVT OF N C T OF DELHI & ANR.
- Citation / case number
- CRL.M.C.-3373/2025 2025:DHC:8324
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- CHINTU KUMAR & ORS.
- Respondent
- STATE GOVT OF N C T OF DELHI & ANR.
Judgment text excerpt
$~51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 19.09.2025 ,,,,,,,,,, + CRL.M.C.3373/2025 & CRL.M.A. 14839/2025 EXEMPTION CHINTU KUMAR& ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Mr. Arun Kumar Sharma, Advs. versus STATE GOVT OF N C T OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP with SI Abhishek, PS Inderpuri & ASI Nammo Narayan, PS Vikaspuri. Mr. N.K. Paswan, Adv. for R-2. 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. 274/2023, dated 12.10.2023, registered at P.S Inderpuri, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 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 marriage between Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent no. 2/complainant was solemnized on 21.05.2021 as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies. No CRL.M.C.3373/2025 Page 1 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Date:20.09.2025 12:47:46 child was born out of the said wedlock. However, on account of temperamental differences Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 are living separately since 22.11.2021. 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. Chargesheet has since been filed under sections 498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners. 4. During the course of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved their disputes and the terms of the compromise were reduced into writing in the form of a Mediation Settlement dated 02.05.2024. In view of the aforesaid settlement, petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 have obta