Allowed¶21

Abid Iqbal v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Quashing of FIR – Section 528 BNSS

Delhi HC27 Jul 2026CRL.M.C./5163/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court (Saurabh Banerjee, J., 27.07.2026) allows CRL.M.C. 5163/2026 under Section 528 BNSS and quashes FIR No.74/2021, PS Sarai Rohilla, under Section 4 MWPRM Act 2019, on mutual mediation settlement (11.09.2025, Tis Hazari), Mubaratnama dated 17.12.2025 and payment of Rs.4,00,000/- full and final settlement; follows Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303, Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Jitendra Raghuvanshi (2013) 4 SCC 58 on quashing criminal proceedings upon settlement.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No.74/2021 dated 16.02.2021 registered at PS.: Sarai Rohilla, Delhi under Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act, 2019 and all proceedings emanating therefrom; petition disposed of in the aforesaid terms. ¶21

Abid Iqbal Vs State (Government of NCT of Delhi) & Anr. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No.74/2021 dated 16.02.2021 registered at PS.: Sarai Rohilla, Delhi under Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act, 2019, and all proceedings emanating therefrom, should be quashed in view of the mutual settlement between the petitioner and respondent no.2.

¶10

Court's answer

A settlement based on mutual terms between the petitioner and respondent no.2, accompanied by their respective affidavits, is the basis of the petition; in view thereof, the present is a fit case for quashing the FIR.

¶18

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, and since there is nothing left to corroborate and prove the case of the prosecution, continuation of the FIR would be an exercise in futility.

¶21

Key takeaways

The petition is allowed; FIR No.74/2021 dated 16.02.2021 registered at PS.: Sarai Rohilla, Delhi under Section 4 of the MWPRM Act and all proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of FIR — Section 528 BNSS — FIR No.74/2021 dated 16.02.2021, PS.: Sarai Rohilla, Delhi, under Section 4, Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act, 2019 — quashed on the basis of Mediation Settlement dated 11.09.2025 (Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi) between petitioner and respondent no.2; marriage dissolved by mutual Divorce/Mubaratnama dated 17.12.2025; out of total settlement of Rs.4,00,000/-, Rs.2,00,000/- already paid and remaining Rs.2,00,000/- paid by Demand Drafts Nos.300617 and 300618 dated 14.07.2026 (Bank of Baroda) as full and final settlement including alimony and maintenance; parties present in Court and identified by the Investigating Officer; APP and respondent no.2 raised no objection; following Jitendra Raghuvanshi (2013) 4 SCC 58, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466, and since nothing was left to corroborate and prove the prosecution case, continuation of the FIR would be an exercise in futility — FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom quashed; petition allowed and disposed of (Saurabh Banerjee, J., 27.07.2026).

¶1

$~66

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CRL.M.C. 5163/2026, CRL.M.A. 21691/2026 ABID IQBAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Naved and Mr. Sunder, Advs.

¶4

versus

¶5

STATE (GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

¶6

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP with Ms. Upasana Bakshi, Divya Bakshi and Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh, Advocates ASI Har Swaroop, PS.: Sarai Rohilla Mr. Jabbar Hussain and Mr. Anubhav, Advs. for R-2

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶9

O R D E R % 27.07.2026

¶10

By virtue of the present petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ), the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.74/2021 dated 16.02.2021 registered at PS.: Sarai Rohilla, Delhi under Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act, 2019 ( MWPRM Act ) and all proceedings emanating therefrom as the petitioner and respondent no.2 have mutually settled all their disputes before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi vide Mediation Settlement dated 11.09.2025 ( Annexure P3) whereby the petitioner and the respondent no.2 have mutually resolved their disputes.

¶11

Issue notice.

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 30/07/2026 at 14:33:52

¶14

Learned APP accepts notice and submits that he has no objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR.

¶15

Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 also accepts notice and submits that the respondent no.2 has no objection if the present petition is allowed.

¶16

This Court has further had the occasion of interacting with the petitioner as well as the respondent no.2, who all are present in Court. They affirm the terms of the aforesaid Mediation Settlement dated 11.09.2025, and out of the total settlement amount of Rs.4,00,000/, the petitioner has already paid her the settlement amount of Rs.2,00,000/- and the remaining sum of Rs.2,00,000/- has been paid to her by way of two Demand Drafts being DD No.300617 and DD No.300618 both dated 14.07.2026 and drawn on Bank of Baroda as full and final settlement of all her present, past and future claims including alimony, maintenance, etc. They submit that the marriage inter se the respondent no.2 and petitioner has since been dissolved by mutual Divorce/ Mubaratnama on 17.12.2025, and as such, the parties have agreed to put a quietus to their disputes. Respondent no.2 hence submits that she does not wish to continue with the aforesaid FIR against the petitioner.

¶17

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

¶18

As noted above, a settlement based on mutual terms between the petitioner and the respondent no.2 is the basis of filing the present petition, which is accompanied by their respective affidavit(s) qua the said effect. In view thereof, the present is a fit case for quashing the aforesaid FIR.

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 30/07/2026 at 14:33:52

¶21

Accordingly, 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 , and also since there is nothing left to corroborate and prove the case of the prosecution, continuation of the present FIR will be an exercise in futility. 8. Therefore, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.74/2021 dated 16.02.2021 registered at PS.: Sarai Rohilla, Delhi under Section 4 of the MWPRM Act as also all proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.

¶22

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

¶23

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶24

JULY 27, 2026/ bh

¶25

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 30/07/2026 at 14:33:52

Abid Iqbal v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abid Iqbal v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) & 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

Rahmatullah @ Rahmat Siddiqui Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rupinder Kaur & Anr. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Parvesh Mann @ Sagar (in Jc) Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Atif Faizan & Ors. Vs State (Government of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Rupesh Chopra and Ors. Vs Govt of Nctof Delhi and Anr.

Atif Faizan Vs State (Government of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.