Amit Dhawan and Ors. Vs the State N C T of Delhi and Anr.

¶1

$~51

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 12^th May, 2026

¶4

- W.P.(CRL) 1028/2026 AMIT DHAWAN AND ORS

¶5

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rambir Singh, Advocate alongwith petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 in person.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE N C T OF DELHI AND ANR

¶8

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl) for the State with Mr. Abhinav Kumar and Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advocates. SI Vinod Kumar. Respondent No.2 in person.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶11

Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No. 0278/2023 dated 29.05.2023 registered at Police Station Mehrauli for commission of offences under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 2. Marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was solemnized on 10.02.2020 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. No child is born from the abovesaid wedlock.

¶12

However, on account of some matrimonial discord and temperamental

¶13

W.P.(CRL) 1028/2026 1

¶14

Signature Not Verified

¶15

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 4.05.2026 11:07:39

¶16

differences, the parties started residing separately and when a complaint was lodged by respondent No. 2 it resulted into in registration of abovesaid FIR. 4. Charge-sheet has not been filed and the case is at the stage of investigation.

¶17

However, when the matter was referred to mediation, the parties were able to amicably resolve the matter under the aegis of Counselling Cell, Rohini Courts on 11.03.2025 and have decided to part ways, gracefully.

¶18

It is in the abovesaid backdrop that quashing is being sought.

¶19

Petitioners are present in person.

¶20

Respondent No.2 is present with her counsel and has been duly identified by her counsel as well as by Investigating Officer.

¶21

When asked, respondent No. 2 reiterates the terms of settlement. She also submits that there is already a divorce between them by way of mutual consent on 14.01.2026. She states that she has agreed to accept a total sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- towards her istridhan, alimony, maintenance (past, present and future). She submits that she has already received a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- and balance amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- has been received today by way of Demand Draft drawn on ICICI Bank.

¶22

She states that she has entered into the abovesaid settlement out of her own free will, without any coercion and influence from any corner whatsoever and therefore, she would have ‘ no objection ’ if FIR in question is quashed.

¶23

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

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

W.P.(CRL) 1028/2026 2

¶26

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 4.05.2026 11:07:39

¶27

petitioners.

¶28

Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.

¶29

Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 0278/2023 dated 29.05.2023 registered at Police Station Mehrauli for commission of offences under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is, hereby, quashed. Original affidavit of respondent No.2 shall be handed over to concerned SHO/IO within ten days.

¶30

The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶31

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

¶32

MAY 12, 2026/ss/pb

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

W.P.(CRL) 1028/2026 3

¶35

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 4.05.2026 11:07:39

Amit Dhawan and Ors. v. the State N C T of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Dhawan and Ors. v. the State N C T of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kapil Sharma Vs the State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Satender Singh Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Rakesh Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.

Swarn Preet Singh and Ors. Vs State ( NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Sonu Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Naresh Singh Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Omkar Dubey Vs State NCT of Delhi

Mr Navendu Agrawal Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Kapil Sharma Vs the State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Naveen Vs State NCT of Delhi

Pappu Kumar Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Anshul Gupta Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Abdul Rabbani @ Rabba Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Pankaj Oswal through Constituted Attorney Sanjay Wali Vs Vishnu Menaria and Anr.