[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Sh. Vipin Verma And Ors vs State (Gnct Of Delhi) And Anr on 13 February, 2026
$~72
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 13th February, 2026
+ CRL.M.C. 1268/2026 & CRL.M.A. 5094/2026
SH. VIPIN VERMA AND ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ranvir Vats and Mr. Sahil Vats,
Advocates
versus
STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) AND ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for
State
SI Jitender Singh, PS Burari
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No. 0392/2022 dated
25.04.2022, registered at Police Station Burari, 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. There was a love marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no.
2 which took place in the year 2013, as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. The
parties were blessed with a baby boy in the year 2014.
3. However, owing to temperamental differences, parties started living
separately and on the basis of report lodged by respondent no. 2, present FIR
was registered.
4. However, when the matter was taken up by the Counseling Cell,
Family Court, Delhi, owing to the efforts made by the Counselor and
respective counsel of the parties, they were able to reach to an amicable
settlement. In terms of such settlement, marriage in question has been
dissolved as there is a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent on
16.02.2024.
5. Respondent no. 2, who is present in Court, submits that she has already
moved on in her life and has also re-married. Investigating officer is also
present and identifies her.
6. She reiterates the terms of settlement and states that she would have no
objection if present FIR is quashed. She also submits that as per terms of
such settlement, their son would remain in the custody of petitioner no. 1 and
she would have visitation rights, as per the settlement terms.
7. Charge-sheet has, though, been filed, charges have yet not been
framed.
8. There are allegations for offence under Section 377 IPC against
husband and for offence under Section 354-A IPC against petitioner no. 2
Praveen Verma (borther-in-law). However, respondent no. 2 submits that
she does not want to pursue aforesaid matter and seeks closure of the
proceedings, particularly, keeping in mind the fact that she has already
re-married.
9. It is informed that the mother of respondent no.2, who was also accused
in the aforesaid criminal case, has expired on 12.05.2024. Copy of her death
certificate has been supplied to the IO, during the course of proceedings.
10. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with
criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose.
11. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under
Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
12. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice FIR No. 0392/2022 dated
25.04.2022, registered at Police Station Burari, for commission of offences
under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings
arising therefrom, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom,
is hereby, quashed.
13. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
14. Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 13, 2026/dr/sa
