Rohit Lehra and Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

¶1

$~94

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 21^st May, 2026

¶4

W.P.(CRL) 1169/2026 ROHIT LEHRA AND ORS .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Neetu Singh, Ms. Tapati Ray and Ms. Anju Rani, Advocates along with petitioners-in-person

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, learned Standing Counsel (Crl.) for State/R-1 with SI Arvind Kumar, PS Kalyan Puri Mr. Manjeet Singh and Mr. Sumit Kwatra, Advocates for R-2/complainant R-2/complainant in person

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

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

¶9

When the present matter was taken up on 13.04.2026, following observations were made: -

¶10

1. Petitioners seeks quashing of FIR No. 415/2024 dated 01.09.2024 registered at Police Station Kalyan Puri for commission of offences under Section 118(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Section 324 IPC).

¶11

2. Charge-sheet is yet to be filed.

¶12

3. Learned Standing Counsel for State/R-1, on instructions from IO, submits that since injury was found to be simple in nature, the offence revealed is under Section 118(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 which invites maximum sentence of three years.

¶13

W.P.(CRL) 1169/2026 1

¶14

Signature Not Verified

¶15

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 3.05.2026 12:51:00

¶16

4. Marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 was solemnized on 21.11.2019 as per Hindu rites and customs and the couple was blessed with a baby-boy whose custody is presently with respondent No. 2.

¶17

5. On account of temperamental and behavior differences, parties started residing separately since 28.08.2024.

¶18

6. Alleged incident is of 28.08.2024 when petitioner no. 1 had come to the house of his in-laws as his wife was staying there and he wanted her to return to her matrimonial home. Since respondent No. 2 was not interested in going back to her matrimonial home, the aforesaid incident took place which resulted in burn injuries on the legs of respondent No. 2.

¶19

7. Investigating officer is present with case diary and same has been perused. The burn injuries have been opined to be simple in nature as per opinion recorded on 06.11.2024.

¶20

8. Respondent No. 2 is present with her counsel. She has been duly identified by investigating officer and her counsel. When the Court put a query to her whether she was interested in quashing of the FIR, particularly in view of the nature of allegations appearing in the FIR, she was found very categoric and submitted that she would have no objection if the FIR is quashed. She submits that all the matters related to the aforesaid marriage have been settled under the aegis of Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi on 02.02.2026 and in terms of such settlement, parties have agreed to give divorce to each other by way of mutual consent and First Motion statement under Section 13-B(1) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has already been recorded by the learned Judge, Family Court on 12.03.2026. She submits that she has already received Rs. 7 lacs and the balance amount of Rs. 7 lacs would be paid at the time of recording of statement under Section 13-B(2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

¶21

9. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that they are in the process of filing Second Motion Petition.

¶22

10. It will be appropriate to await for the statement of Second Motion to be recorded and thereafter to consider the present petition.”

¶23

Investigating officer is present and, besides identifying respondent No.2, he submits that charge-sheet has yet not been filed.

¶24

It is apprised that petition under Section 13B(2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 could not be taken up by learned Judge, Family Court and the next

¶25

W.P.(CRL) 1169/2026 2

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 3.05.2026 12:51:00

¶28

date is stated to be 04.07.2026.

¶29

However, there is development in the interregnum, as the entire settlement amount of Rs. 14 lacs has been paid by the petitioners to respondent No. 2.

¶30

Respondent No. 2 submits that she had earlier received a sum of Rs. 12 lacs and the balance amount of Rs. 2 lacs has been received by her today by way of demand draft bearing No. 000398 dated 06.05.2026 drawn on Bank of India, South Extension Branch, New Delhi. She submits that since she wants to move on in her life and may leave Delhi for new job assignment, she would have no objection if the present petition is disposed of today. She reiterates that she does not want to press the charges in question and would have ‘ no objection ’ if the FIR is quashed. She also submits that she has fully recovered from the injuries in question. She also submits that there was matrimonial discord between them but she never lodged any criminal case in relation to offences under Section 498A/406 IPC. She reiterates that she has entered into settlement voluntarily and without any pressure or coercion.

¶31

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. Reference be made to Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr., (2014) 6 SCC 466, wherein the Apex Court had observed that proceedings, even in non-compoundable cases, can be quashed on the basis of settlement provided that the Court is satisfied that there was no meaningful purpose in continuing with the proceedings, and that the scope of conviction was remote and bleak. 7. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , it is deemed appropriate to quash the FIR.

¶32

Signature Not Verified

¶33

W.P.(CRL) 1169/2026 3

¶34

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 3.05.2026 12:51:00

¶35

Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 415/2024 dated 01.09.2024 registered at Police Station Kalyan Puri for commission of offences under Section 118(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Section 324 IPC), along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed. Original affidavits of the parties, copies of which have been filed with the present petition, shall be submitted before the investigating officer within two weeks from today.

¶36

The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶37

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

¶38

MAY 21, 2026/ dr/pb

¶39

Signature Not Verified

¶40

W.P.(CRL) 1169/2026 4

¶41

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 3.05.2026 12:51:00

Rohit Lehra and Ors. v. the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Lehra and Ors. v. the State NCT 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep & Anr. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Kasim Alam and Anr. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Jannat Kapoor Vs State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Vijay @ Vijender Vs the State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Kulbir Singh Uberoi and Ors. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Mohd Saeed Vs State Gnct of Delhi

Awaaz Production Ltd. & Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Ritika & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Sameer @Wajid Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Shaikh Mohammad Sayeed Vs Reshma Bahadur

Harish Chander Vs State NCT of Delhi

Nakul Jain Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Honey Kharbanda and Anr. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.