[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Hemant & Ors vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 16 February, 2026
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 16th February, 2026
+ CRL.M.C. 661/2026
HEMANT & ORS.
.....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advocate
alongwith petitioner No.1 in person
and petitioner No.2, 3 & 4 in person
(through V.C.).
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the
State with SI Rahul Ranjan.
Mr. Vishav Kamal, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 61/2021 dated 17.01.2021,
registered at P.S. Harsh Vihar, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, along with
all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of settlement
arrived at between the parties.
2. Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 got married on 30.04.2013 in
Delhi according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The parties were blessed with
a baby girl in the year 2015.
3. However, on account of some temperamental differences and
incompatibility issues, they started residing separately and when the matter
was reported to police by respondent No.2, it resulted in registration of
abovesaid FIR.
4. Charge-sheet has already been filed and the matter is at the stage of
arguments on charge.
5. However, in the interregnum, on account of intervention of elders and
well-wishers, both the parties arrived at amicable settlement and
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was executed on 28.02.2025 and in
terms of such MoU, the parties have already obtained divorce by way of
mutual consent on 07.08.2025.
6. As per such settlement, respondent No.2 has agreed to accept a sum of
Rs.4,75,000/- in lieu of istridhan, dowry articles, alimony, maintenance (past,
present and future). The custody of the girl child would remain with
respondent No.2, with no visitation right to the father/ petitioner No.1.
7. Respondent No.2 is present in Court alongwith her counsel and has
been duly identified by her counsel as well as I.O.
8. She reiterates the terms of the settlement. She also submits that she had
earlier received a sum of Rs.2 lacs when the divorce had taken place and now
the balance settlement amount of Rs.2,75,000/- has been given to her in shape
of Demand Draft drawn on Bank of Baroda. She submits that the settlement is
voluntary in nature and she would have no objection if the present FIR is
quashed in view of the abovesaid settlement.
9. 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.
10. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under
Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
11. Consequently, to secure the ends of FIR No. 61/2021 dated 17.01.2021,
registered at P.S. Harsh Vihar, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, along with
all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, along with all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom, is hereby, quashed.
12. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 16, 2026/ss/sa
