Quashing of Non-Compoundable Matrimonial Proceedings Permissible Under Section 528 BNSS Following Voluntary Settlement and Divorce

The petitioners filed a petition seeking the quashing of FIR No. 14/2019, registered at PS Crime (Women) Cell, Nanak Pura, involving offences under Sections 498A, 406, 34, and 354 of the IPC.

The marriage between Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 (the complainant) took place on 08.11.2000, but they separated due to temperamental differences, leading to allegations of matrimonial cruelty, outraging of modesty, and Section 377 IPC.

During the pendency of trial, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on 22.05.2025, settled all disputes, and obtained a divorce by mutual consent on 14.01.2026.

As per the settlement, a flat was transferred to Respondent No. 2, and Petitioner No. 1 committed to bearing the educational expenses of their younger son.

Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings in non-compoundable matrimonial cases based on a voluntary settlement between the parties.

The court primarily applied Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (formerly Section 482 CrPC), regarding the inherent powers of the High Court to quash proceedings to secure the ends of justice.

It relied on the precedent established in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012) and Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (2014), which held that proceedings in non-compoundable cases can be quashed if the dispute is primarily private/matrimonial in nature and the prospect of conviction is remote due to a compromise.

The Court observed that the parties had resolved all matrimonial grievances and were already granted a decree of divorce.

Respondent No. 2 appeared in person and stated that the settlement was reached voluntarily without coercion, expressing "no objection" to the quashing of the FIR.

The Court reasoned that since the dispute is private in nature and does not involve public interest, continuing the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would be a futile exercise of judicial time, especially as the complainant no longer wished to press charges.

The quashing was made subject to the petitioners depositing a cost of Rs. 20,000/- with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within four weeks. The Court further directed that the original settlement deed and affidavits be placed before the Trial Court on the next scheduled hearing date.