The Delhi High Court has declined to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash FIR No. 09/2021 registered at PS Shahdara for offences under Sections 498A, 406, 354, 34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, notwithstanding the settlement arrived at between the complainant and the petitioners. Justice Girish Kathpalia, in the judgment delivered on 05.05.2026 in CRL.M.C. 3454/2026, held that the FIR contains extremely serious and specific allegations of sexual misconduct which cannot be brushed aside merely on the basis of a compromise between the parties.
The petitioners, including Ashish Kalra and others, sought quashing of the FIR on the ground that the complainant de facto (respondent No.2) had settled all matrimonial disputes with them. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the settled legal position that the High Court can quash proceedings in matrimonial matters where the dispute is essentially civil in nature and continuation of the criminal case would not serve the ends of justice. However, the learned APP for the State drew the attention of the Court to the grave allegations of sexual misconduct levelled against petitioner No.2, the brother-in-law of the complainant.
The FIR, spanning 18 pages, inter alia alleged that on 24.05.2020, when the complainant came out of the bathroom, she found petitioner No.2 lying on her bed. He played a porn movie on his mobile phone at high volume, forced her for sexual favours, passed obnoxious remarks, threatened to circulate her bath video if she objected, caught hold of her hand and pulled her. When she raised an alarm, the other petitioners entered the room and threatened her with death if she disclosed the incident. The complainant, who was present in person before the Court, affirmed the incident when confronted with the petitioners’ denial.
The Court observed that while there is no dispute about the power of the High Court to quash matrimonial disputes in appropriate cases, the instant matter involves heinous allegations of sexual misconduct which go far beyond ordinary matrimonial or civil wrongs. The expression “interest of justice” does not permit the Court to look the other way and allow such serious charges to go unpunished merely to reduce pendency or suit the convenience of the parties. The Court clarified that it is not conducting a mini-trial on the truthfulness of the allegations, which is a matter for the trial court after full evidence, but emphasized that such grave accusations cannot be dumped under the carpet through invocation of inherent powers.
The High Court acknowledged the rising trend of complaints under Section 498A/406 IPC sometimes containing serious sexual misconduct allegations, but cautioned against taking a general view that all such allegations are false. Each case must be tested on its own merits so that genuine victims are not prejudiced. If after trial the allegations are found false, the complainant may face consequences, but inherent jurisdiction cannot be used to quash such serious offences at the threshold. In view of the nature of allegations and the interest of justice, the petition and the accompanying application were dismissed.
Case Details:
Title: Ashish Kalra and Others Versus State of NCT of Delhi and Another
Citation: 2026:DHC:13822
Case No.: CRL.M.C. 3454/2026 & CRL.M.A. 14026/2026
Coram: Justice Girish Kathpalia
Date of Judgment: 05.05.2026
Click HERE for full Judgment.
Lawcutor 