[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Raj Kumar Rai Alias Raj Kumar Ray & Ors vs The State Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 2 February, 2026
$~13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 02nd February, 2026
+ CRL.M.C. 300/2026& CRL.M.A. 1132/2026 & CRL.M.A.
1133/2026
RAJ KUMAR RAI ALIAS RAJ KUMAR RAY & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Ms. Kajal Rani, Advocate with
petitioners in person.
versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR ....Respondents
Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for the State with
SI Ingkumnaro, PS New Ashok Nagar
Advocate for the respondent No.2
(appearance not given) with
respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. Petitioners herein seeks quashing of FIR No.590/2016 dated
17.11.2016, registered at P.S. New Ashok Nagar, for commission of offences
under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC along with all consequential proceedings
arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.
2. Petitioner No.1 got married to respondent No.2 on 27.10.2013 as per
Hindu rites and ceremonies. Parties were blessed with a baby boy on
13.10.2014
3. However, on account of some matrimonial discord and temperamental
differences, parties could not live together and started residing separately with
effect from 24.01.2015.
4. Respondent No.2 had lodged a complaint with the police, which
resulted in registration of abovesaid FIR.
5. Fact, however, remains that both the parties have now settled their
matrimonial disputes and have agreed to part ways in a graceful manner.
6. Chargesheet has already been filed and the case is, reportedly, at the
stage of prosecution evidence.
7. Parties have already obtained divorce by way of mutual consent on
15.10.2025 and as full and final settlement, respondent No.2 has received a
total sum of Rs.4 lacs in lieu of alimony, istridhan, maintenance for self (past,
present and future). Out of the abovesaid amount of Rs.4 lacs, a sum of Rs.2
lacs has been received today in the shape of FDR, in the name of her son FDR
is drawn on HDFC Bank.
8. As per terms of settlement, the custody of the son of the parties would
remain with respondent No.2 only, with no visitation rights to petitioners.
There is no other matter pending between the parties in relation to their
matrimonial discord in question.
9. Petitioners are present in Court.
10. Respondent No.2 is present and is represented by her counsel. The
Investigating Officer (I.O.) is present and identifies her.
11. When asked, respondent No.2 has reiterated the terms and conditions
of the settlement and submits that in view of the settlement, she is no longer
interested in pursuing with instant FIR and would have no objection if the FIR
in question is quashed.
12. 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
petitioners.
13. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under
Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
14. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.590/2016 dated
17.11.2016, registered at P.S. New Ashok Nagar, for commission of offences
under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC along with all consequential proceedings
emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed.
15. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
16. Pending applications also stand disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 02, 2026/st/js
