Disposed

Nitin Sardana v. State & Anr.

Delhi HC20 Feb 2026CRL.M.C./523/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Husband sought quashing of a 498A/406/34 IPC FIR after matrimonial disputes were settled before the Family Court counselling cell and the parties obtained divorce by mutual consent. The wife confirmed receipt of the settlement amount and raised no objection. The court quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.281/2022 dated 01.08.2022, PS Timarpur, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all consequential proceedings quashed.

Nitin Sardana Vs State & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~38

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 20^th February, 2026

¶4

- CRL.M.C. 523/2026 & CRL.M.A. 2111/2026

¶5

NITIN SARDANA .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Himanshu Nagpal, Advocate with petitioner in person.

¶7

versus

¶8

STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for the State with SI Manju Radha, PS Timarpur. Ms. Shikha Soni with Mr. Saurabh Soni, Advocates for complainant with complainant in person.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

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

¶11

Petitioner herein seeks quashing of FIR No.281/2022 dated 01.08.2022, registered at P.S. Timarpur, 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.

¶12

Petitioner got married to respondent No.2 on 24.06.2012, as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. The parties were blessed with a baby girl from such wedlock in the year 2013.

¶13

However, on account of some compatibility issues, parties started living separately and, on account of matrimonial discord, a complaint was lodged by respondent No.2, which resulted into registration of abovesaid FIR. 4. Charge-sheet has yet not been filed.

¶14

Signature Not Verified

¶15

CRL.M.C.523/2026 1

¶16

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 1.02.2026 16:43:24

¶17

Learned Addl. P.P. for the State submits that besides petitioner, two more persons were named in the petition, one of them is younger brother of the petitioner.

¶18

Fact, however, remains that both the parties have been able to settle all their matrimonial disputes and have agreed to part ways in a graceful manner. 7. It is informed that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties before the Counselling Cell of Family Court, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi . A copy of such settlement dated 11.03.2022 has been placed on record. 8. Parties have already obtained decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, on 28.07.2025. Copy of decree of divorce has also been placed on record. 9. Petitioner is present in Court. 10. Respondent No.2 is present in Court with her counsel. The Investigating Officer (I.O.) is also present and identifies her. 11. When asked, Respondent No.2 reiterated the terms of such settlement and submits that, in terms of settlement, she had agreed to accept a sum of Rs.3.5 lacs in lieu of alimony, istridhan , maintenance for self (past, present and future) and submits that the entire abovesaid amount has already been received by her. She also submits that, as per the settlement terms, her daughter would remain in her custody, with no visitation rights to the petitioner. She submits that since she has settled all her disputes with the petitioner amicably, she would have no objection if the present FIR is quashed, in its entirety, against all the accused.

¶19

The affidavits of petitioner as well as respondent No.2 are also annexed with the petition. The contents of the affidavits have also been perused. 13. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with

¶20

Signature Not Verified

¶21

CRL.M.C.523/2026 2

¶22

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 1.02.2026 16:43:24

¶23

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 petitioner.

¶24

Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR. 15. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.281/2022 dated 01.08.2022, registered at P.S. Timarpur, for commission of offences under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC , along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed.

¶25

The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶26

Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶27

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

¶28

FEBRUARY 20, 2026/st/js

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally Signed CRL.M.C.523/2026 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 1.02.2026 16:43:24

¶31

Nitin Sardana v. State & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitin Sardana v. State & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajender Singh Pawar @ Raju & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Salma Vs State NCT of Delhi

Vikash @ Kake Vs State (Govt. of the NCT Delhi)

Alexander Obike Obnozie Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Kanika Gautam Vs State NCT of Delhi

Mr. Ravi Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)