2026:CGHC:17038-DB Digitally signed by NAFR ANURADHA ANURADHA TIWARI TIWARI Date:

2026.04.16 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

10:40:15 +0530 CRMP No. 1037 of 2026

1 - Irshad Ahmad S/o Hadish Ahmad, Presently Aged About 37 Years R/o LIG -165, Dhansuli, Raipur, Tehsil And District- Raipur (C.G.)

2 - Hadish Ahmad S/o Late Md. Gazi Aged About 66 Years R/o MIG

01/2575, Housing Board Kurud, P.S. Jamul District- Durg (C.G.)

3 - Anjum Aara W/o Hadish Ahmad Aged About 60 Years R/o MIG

01/2575, Housing Board Kurud, P.S. Jamul District- Durg (C.G.)

4 - Asfaq Ahmad S/o Late Md. Gazi Aged About 30 Years R/o MIG

01/2575, Housing Board Kurud, P.S. Jamul District- Durg (C.G.)

... Petitioners versus

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Mahila Thana, Durg, Durg (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Sofiya Fatima W/o Irshad Ahmad, Aged About 37 Years R/o -

193, Mosque, Near Kela Badi, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.)

... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioners : Mr. Achyut Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

15.04.2026

1. Heard Mr. Achyut Tiwari, learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/Respondent No.1.

2. By filing the present petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’), the Petitioners have prayed for following relief(s) :-

“It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and kindly set aside/quash the F.I.R./crime no. 05/2015 registered on dated 07.06.2015 at police station Mahila Thana, Durg, Durg (C.G.), the charge sheet filed against the petitioners under section 498A, 34 of I.P.C. and Sec. 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (Annexure-P/1), judgment of conviction dated 30.12.2023 passed by the learned JMFC, Durg in criminal case No. 6121 of 2015 (Annexure-P/2), order dated 15.01.2026 passed by the learned Appellate Court (part of Annexure-P/6) and the proceedings of appeal bearing CRA No. 24 of 2024 pending before the Court of Additional Session Judge, District Durg (C.G.) against the petitioners, in the interest of justice.”

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the present case emanates purely from a matrimonial discord between Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.2, which, with the passage of time and intervention of elders and mediators, has now been amicably and voluntarily resolved between the parties. It is contended that the dispute does not involve any element of public interest or grave societal impact, but is essentially personal in nature, arising out of strained marital relations. Drawing attention to the mediation report dated 07.01.2026, it is urged that the parties have consciously decided to bury their differences and move on in life, and therefore, continuance of the criminal proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose and would rather amount to an abuse of the process of law.

4. Learned counsel further submits that the settlement arrived at between the parties is bona fide, voluntary, and without any coercion or undue influence. The same is evident not only from the mediation report but also from the statements recorded before the learned Appellate Court, wherein both parties unequivocally expressed their willingness to resolve all disputes and put an end to the litigation. It is emphasized that pursuant to the said settlement, the petitioners have already taken substantial steps by preparing demand drafts aggregating to Rs.25,00,000/- in favour of Respondent No.2 towards full and final settlement, thereby demonstrating their bona fides and commitment to honour the terms of compromise.

5. It is further argued that although the offences under Section 498A of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are technically non-compoundable, it