$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4668/2025 RANVIJAY SONKAR AND ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. A. K. Mishra, Adv. with the petitioners in person versus STATE THE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State with Ms. Divya Bakshi, Adv. along with SI Manoj and SI Puran, PS Dabri CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

O R D E R

% 03.12.2025

1. The instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter “BNSS”) [earlier Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter “CrPC”)] has been filed on behalf of the petitioners praying for the quashing of FIR No. 1048/2021, registered at Police Station Dabri, for offences punishable under Sections

498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”).

2. The brief facts concerning the present dispute are that the marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 was solemnized on 19.04.2018, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. However, due to some temperamental differences between them, shortly after their marriage, they started living separately.

3. Despite efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle their differences, pursuant to which respondent no. 2 got FIR No. 1048/2021 registered.

4. However, at this stage, with the intervention of family members and relatives, both the parties have entered a settlement on 07.02.2025 before the Mediation Centre, Dwarka Courts, Delhi (hereinafter “settlement deed”). The terms and conditions of the said settlement are mentioned in the settlement deed which is annexed as “Annexure B” to the petition. In pursuance of the said settlement, the parties have jointly agreed that they shall live together and they undertake that they shall abide by the terms and conditions of the compromise.

5. It is, thus, prayed that the instant FIR be quashed on the basis of compromise.

6. Learned APP for the State submits that there is no opposition to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

8. The instant criminal proceedings concern non-compoundable offences that are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, especially considering that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the accused.

9. In such cases, it is settled law that High Court is also required to consider the conduct and antecedents of the accused in order to ascertain that the settlement has been entered into by her own free will and has not been imposed upon her by the petitioners or any person related to them.

10. In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Ors. (2019) 5 SCC 688, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the powers conferred under Section 482 of the CrPC/Section 528 of the BNSS, can be exercised by the Courts to quash criminal proceedings featuring non- compoundable offences, when the matter arises out of matrimonial or family disputes. Moreover, it is pertinent to satisfy the Court that the said non- compoundable offences are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society.

11. Furthermore, it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramgopal and Ors. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh 2021 INSC 568, that the extraordinary power enjoined upon the High Courts under Section 482 of the CrPC/Section 528 of the BNSS can be invoked even when such a case falls within the ambit of non-compoundable offences, given that the Court is satisfied that the nature of the offence does not impact the conscience of society, and that the compromise between the parties is voluntary and amicable.

12. The petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel and the Investigating Officer, Police Station Dabri. Respondent no. 2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel and the co