Rohit & Anr. Vs the State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

¶1

$~16

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 06^th January, 2026

¶4

- CRL.M.C. 74/2026 & CRL.M.A. 240/2026

¶5

ROHIT & ANR. .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Anita Saini and Ms. Garima, Advocates along with petitioners-in-person

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate along with R-2 Ms. Madhu in person SI Pratiksha, PS Prem Nagar

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

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

¶10

CRL.M.A. 240/2026 (for exemption)

¶11

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

CRL.M.C. 74/2026

¶13

The present petition has been preferred seeking quashing of FIR No. 518/2021 dated 29.07.2021, registered at Police Station Prem Nagar, for commission of offences under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶14

FIR was registered on the basis of complaint lodged by Ms. Madhu. She got married to accused Rohit on 28.04.2017 and as per allegations made by her in her complaint, there was demand of dowry and she was treated with

¶15

CRL.M.C. 74/2026 1

¶16

Signature Not Verified

¶17

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 7.01.2026 16:54:43

¶18

cruelty. On the basis of her such allegations, FIR was registered for commission of offences under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC.

¶19

Charge-sheet was prepared and sent to the concerned Magisterial Court.

¶20

Charges have already been framed by the learned Magisterial Court and as per order dated 09.02.2024, accused Rohit (husband) and accused Sharda (mother-in-law) have been charged under Section 498A/34 IPC and accused Sharda has also been charged under Section 406 IPC. Other two accused i.e. Sunny and Sharda have been discharged. Thus, at the moment, two accused are facing trial.

¶21

There is now settlement between the parties and complainant Ms. Madhu is present in Court with her counsel.

¶22

IO is also present and she also identifies the complainant.

¶23

When asked, complainant submitted that on account of temperamental issues, they both could not live together. She submits that she is living separately since 01.10.2020 and has entered into settlement on 12.08.2024. As per settlement terms, she has agreed to accept a sum of Rs. 5 lacs in lieu of alimony, istridhan, maintenance (past, present and future). She submits that there is no child from the wedlock in question. She submits that there is already a decree of divorce of mutual consent. In this regard, attention of the Court has been drawn towards order dated 02.05.2025 whereby learned Judge, Family Court has dissolved the marriage by a decree of mutual consent under Section 13B (2) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. She has also received a demand draft of Rs. 2 lacs i.e. balance settlement amount, during the present proceedings.

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

CRL.M.C. 74/2026 2

¶26

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 7.01.2026 16:54:43

¶27

Given the fact that the disputes have been resolved, continuing with present criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose.

¶28

In the above premise, to secure the ends of justice, it is, thus, deemed expedient to quash the FIR in question.

¶29

Accordingly, the FIR No. 518/2021 dated 29.07.2021, for the offences under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Prem Nagar, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom is, hereby, quashed.

¶30

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

¶31

JANUARY 06, 2026/ dr/pb

¶32

Signature Not Verified

¶33

CRL.M.C. 74/2026 3

¶34

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 7.01.2026 16:54:43

Rohit & Anr. v. the State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit & Anr. v. the State (Govt 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravinder Shahni Vs State (Govt. of Nct) Delhi & Anr.

Afsar Vs State Govt of NCT Delhi

Mohd Tufail & Ors. Vs the State of Delhi NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Ravi Kumar & Anr. Vs State of Delhi & Anr.

Tripti Gandhi Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Neha Pathania and Anr. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) and Anr.