Delhi High Court

CRL.M.C./7244/2026 of MANOJ KUMAR AND ORS Vs STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR on 28 September 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010464152026 + CRL.M.C. 7244/2026 MANOJ KUMAR AND ORS .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Monisha Acharya, Adv. Petitioners-in-person versus STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP for State. Mr. Ashutosh Mishra and

$~43

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

#

CNR No. DLHC010464152026

+

CRL.M.C. 7244/2026

MANOJ KUMAR AND ORS

.....Petitioners

Through:

Ms. Monisha Acharya, Adv.

Petitioners-in-person

versus

STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

.....Respondents

Through:

Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP for

State.

Mr. Ashutosh Mishra and Mr. Anshil

Tyagi, Advs. for R2

Respondent no.2-in-person

SI Braham P., PS Sultan Puri

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

O R D E R

% 28.09.2026

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CRL.M.A. 30296/2026

2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

3. Application stands disposed of. CRL.M.C. 7244/2026

4. By way of the present petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNSS’), the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 1030/2023, registered at Police Station Sultan Puri, Delhi, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal

Code,1860 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of an amicable settlement arrived at between the parties.

5. Issue Notice.

6. Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, learned APP for the State accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No. 1/State.

7. Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No. 2/complainant.

8. The petitioners and respondent No.2 are present before this Court. Respondent no.2 has been identified by her counsel as well as the Investigating Officer (IO) concerned.

9. Briefly stated, the marriage between Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 was solemnised on 09.05.2020. Owing to matrimonial differences, the parties started living separately from 20.12.2022. On the complaint of Respondent No. 2, FIR No. 1030/2023 was registered at P.S. Sultan Puri under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC. During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties amicably settled their disputes for a total amount of ₹4,00,000/-, which was paid in full by Petitioner No. 1. The parties thereafter obtained divorce by mutual consent, with the second motion being allowed on 23.07.2026.

10. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 26.02.2026, the parties agreed to settle all their disputes for a total sum of Rs. 4,00,000/-. He submits that the petitioner No. 1 has already paid the agreed amount Rs. 4,00,000/- to the respondent No. 2 in two equal instalments of Rs. 2,00,000/- by way of Demand Drafts at the time of recording of statement of First Motion and Second Motion respectively before the learned Family Court, which fact is acknowledged by respondent No. 2. It is further submitted that, with the said payment, the terms and conditions of the settlement stand fully complied with and nothing further remains to be paid by either party under the settlement.

11. On a query made by this Court, respondent No.2, who has been duly identified by the IO, categorically states that she has entered into the Settlement Agreement dated 26.02.2026 out of her own free will, without any force, coercion or undue influence. She further states that the entire settled amount has been received by her and that she has no surviving claim whatsoever against the petitioners. She has no objection if the present FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

12. In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved all their disputes, the marriage already stands dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent, the entire settlement amount has been paid, and respondent No.2 has no objection to the quashing of the FIR, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the criminal proceedings. Rather, continuation thereof would only perpetuate unnecessary litigation between the parties. There is no legal impediment to quashing the FIR in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

13. Accordingly, FIR No. 1030/2023, registered at Police Station Sultan Puri, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, are hereby quashed.

14. The present petition stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.

15. Copy of the order be communicated to the concerned learned Trial Court for necessary action and compliance.

16. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 28, 2026/b/rm

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead