The Delhi High Court has quashed a 2015 dowry harassment FIR against a husband, holding that continuing the case would serve no useful purpose after the couple settled their disputes through mediation, obtained a divorce by mutual consent and the complainant said she had no objection.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has quashed FIR No. 774/2015, registered on June 20, 2015 at Police Station Dabri under Sections 498A, 406 and 354 read with Section 34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings, against Hari Govind, on the basis of a compromise with his former wife [Hari Govind v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.].
Justice Ravinder Dudeja, in an oral judgment on October 1, 2026, allowed the petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and quashed the FIR qua the petitioner.
Background of the case
The couple married on December 12, 2009 according to Hindu rites and have two children. Owing to temperamental differences, they began living separately in May 2013. On the complaint of the wife, the FIR alleged that she was subjected to cruelty and harassment over dowry demands by her husband and in-laws, that her stridhan was retained, and that her brother-in-law, Harishankar, had molested her.
On January 29, 2024, the Trial Court framed charges under Sections 498A, 406 and 34 IPC against the petitioner and under Section 354 IPC against Harishankar. On August 29, 2024, the Revisional Court discharged Harishankar of the offence under Section 354 IPC.
Settlement and divorce
During the proceedings, the parties resolved their disputes before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Dwarka Courts, through a settlement agreement dated November 29, 2025. The Court was told that they obtained a divorce by mutual consent on August 25, 2026, that the petitioner has paid the entire settlement amount of Rs 11,70,000 as full and final settlement, and that under the settlement one of the two children is in the petitioner’s custody while the other remains with the complainant.
Both parties were present in Court and were identified by their counsel and by the Investigating Officer, SI Sahil Hooda of Police Station Dabri. The complainant confirmed that the matter had been settled without any force, fear or coercion, that she had received the entire settlement amount, and that she had no objection to the FIR being quashed.
The Court’s reasoning
Allowing the petition, the Court held that the dispute is private in nature and involves no public interest:
“In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when dispute does not involve any public interest and is, primarily, private in nature. In any case, even the complainant does not wish to press any charges against the petitioner.”
Exercising its inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS to secure the ends of justice, the Court quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings qua the petitioner.
Directions
The original affidavits of the parties, copies of which are on the Court’s record, are to be submitted before the Trial Court, so that they form part of its record, and to the concerned SHO or Investigating Officer within four weeks.
Why The Dowry Harassment FIR Order Matters
The order shows the factors the Court weighed in ending a matrimonial prosecution that had already reached the stage of charge: a mediated settlement with the full amount paid, a divorce by mutual consent, the complainant’s own statement before the Court that she acted without pressure, and the private nature of the dispute. The relief was granted only in respect of the petitioner, since the co-accused brother-in-law had already been discharged by the Revisional Court in 2024.
Case Title: Hari Govind v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr. [CRL.M.C. 7404/2026]
Bench: Justice Ravinder Dudeja, Delhi High Court
Date of Judgment: October 1, 2026
For the Petitioner: Sushant, Advocate
For the State: Nawal Kishore Jha, Additional Public Prosecutor, with SI Sahil Hooda, Police Station Dabri
For Respondent No. 2: Sakshi Tanwar, Advocate
![[RSS Defamation Case] Court Reserves Verdict Rahul Gandhi's Plea Against Documents](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/image-5-4.png?resize=420%2C345&ssl=1)
