Allowed¶23

Vikas and Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC3 Jul 2026CRL.M.C./4527/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR; Section 528 BNSS inherent powers; Sections 498A/406/506/377/34 IPC; matrimonial dispute; settlement between husband and wife; MoU dated 29.04.2026; parties residing together; affidavit-supported settlement; Section 377 IPC FIR quashed on settlement; Jitendra Raghuvanshi (2013) 4 SCC 58; Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466; PS Ambedkar Nagar Delhi; FIR No.533/2023 dated 16.10.2023; CRL.M.C. 4527/2026; CRL.M.A. 18751/2026; Justice Saurabh Banerjee; High Court of Delhi; 03.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No.533/2023 dated 16.10.2023 registered at PS.: Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/506/377/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom; petition, alongwith the pending application (CRL.M.A. 18751/2026), disposed of in the aforesaid terms ¶23

Vikas and Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT Delhi and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No.533/2023 dated 16.10.2023 registered at PS.: Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/506/377/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom ought to be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS, given the settlement (MoU dated 29.04.2026) between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, who are now residing together

¶12

Court's answer

Even though the FIR was registered under Section 377 IPC, since petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 are presently living their respective lives peacefully together, having voluntarily arrived at a settlement supported by their respective affidavits, this Court is inclined to quash the FIR in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS, quashing being in the interest of the petitioners and respondent no.2

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Following the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jitendra Raghuvanshi (2013) 4 SCC 58, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466, since there is nothing left to corroborate and prove the case of the prosecution, continuation of the FIR against the petitioners will be an exercise in futility

¶18

Key takeaways

FIR No.533/2023 dated 16.10.2023 registered at PS.: Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/506/377/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashedratio¶22
The petitioners and respondent no.2 shall remain bound by all the terms and conditions of the settlement arrived inter se themselvesobiter¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Saurabh Banerjee, J.; order dated 03.07.2026) allowed a petition under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of FIR No.533/2023 dated 16.10.2023, PS.: Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi, under Sections 498A/406/506/377/34 IPC, and all proceedings emanating therefrom. Petitioner no.1 (Vikas) and respondent no.2 had settled all their disputes and differences by a Memorandum of Understanding dated 29.04.2026 supported by proofs of identity and affidavits, were residing together peacefully, and both respondent no.2 (present in Court) and the learned APP raised no objection; the Investigating Officer identified the parties and their credentials. Although the Court noted the FIR included Section 377 IPC, following Jitendra Raghuvanshi (2013) 4 SCC 58, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466, it held that nothing remained to corroborate and prove the prosecution case and continuance of the FIR would be an exercise in futility. The FIR and all proceedings were quashed, the parties to remain bound by the settlement terms; the petition and pending application were disposed of accordingly.

¶1

$~35

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 4527/2026, CRL.M.A. 18751/2026

¶4

VIKAS AND ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Pawan Kr. and Mr. Surender Kr., Advs. with petitioners in person

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP with Mr. Adiya Vikram Singh, Adv. with SI Nikhil Kumar, PS: Ambedkar Nagar. R-2 in person

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 03.07.2026

¶12

By virtue of the present petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ), the petitioners seek quashing of the FIR No.533/2023 dated 16.10.2023 registered at PS.: Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/506/377/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ) and all proceedings emanating therefrom, since the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 have settled all their disputes and differences as also considering the parties are now residing together and in view of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 29.04.2026 ( MoU ) arrived between the petitioners and the respondent no.2, which is accompanied by their respective proofs of identity. 2. Issue notice. Learned APP accepts notice, and submits, that he has no objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR.

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/07/2026 at 11:17:47

¶15

Respondent no.2, present in Court, also accepts notice and affirms the terms of the aforesaid MoU, and as such, she has no objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR.

¶16

The petitioners and the respondent no.2, present in Court, as well as their credentials, as on record, have been identified by the Investigating Officer.

¶17

Upon an overall consideration of the existing facts and circumstances, even though this Court is mindful that the present FIR has been registered under Section 377 of the IPC, however, since the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 are presently living their respective lives peacefully together this Court is inclined to quash the present FIR in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 528 of BNSS. Moreover, they have also voluntarily arrived at a settlement, and the present petition is also supported by their respective affidavit(s) to the said effect, and they shall remain bound by all the terms and conditions of the settlement arrived inter se themselves. As such, the quashing of the present FIR shall be in the interest of the petitioners and respondent no.2.

¶18

Therefore, following the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. vs. Babita Raguvanshi & Anr.: (2013) 4 SCC 58 , Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr.: (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr.: (2014) 6 SCC 466 , since there is nothing left to corroborate and prove the case of the prosecution, continuation of the aforesaid FIR against the petitioners will be an exercise in futility.

¶19

As such, the present petition is thus allowed and FIR No.533/2023 dated 16.10.2023 registered at PS.: Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi under Sections

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/07/2026 at 11:17:47

¶22

498A/406/506/377/34 of the IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.

¶23

Accordingly, the present petition, alongwith the pending application, is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶24

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶25

JULY 3, 2026/So

¶26

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/07/2026 at 11:17:47

Vikas and Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas and Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT 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

Suraj Vs State NCT of Delhi

Devendra Kumar Sharma Vs Manisha Sharma

Ali Sher Vs N.C.T of Delhi and Ors.

Mohan Chand Vs Neetu & Ors.

Hemant Kumar Sharma & Ors. Vs State of N Ct of Delhi & Anr.

Ankit @ Ankit Kumar Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.