$~40
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
%					       Date of Decision: 02nd February, 2026
+ 	CRL.M.C. 602/2026 & CRL.M.A. 2379/2026

	SH. PARDEEP SINGH RATHEE  & ANR.		.....Petitioners
				Through:	Mr. Anuj Kumar with Mr. Ashish 							Mishra, Advocate with petitioners in 							person. 
				versus

	THE STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI & ANR.		.....Respondents
				Through:	Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the 						State with W/ASI Pushpa Rani with SI 						Balshwar, PS Najafgarh. 
						Mr. Puneet Yadav, Advocate with 							respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 						(through V.C.)

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

1. Petitioners herein seeks quashing of FIR No. 95/2024 dated 15.04.2024, registered at P.S. Najaf Garh, for commission of offences under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.
2. Petitioner No.1 got married to respondent No.2 on 25.06.2009 as per Hindu rites and customs.  They were blessed with a baby girl from the abovesaid wedlock on 14.07.2012.
3. However, on account of some matrimonial dispute and temperamental differences, parties could not live together and, initially, respondent No.2 had lodged a complaint with the police, which resulted in registration of abovesaid FIR.
4. Fact, however, remains that both the parties have now settled their matrimonial disputes and have agreed to part ways in a graceful manner.  
5. Broad terms of settlement are contained in Memorandum of Understanding dated 23.09.2025 and in terms thereof, parties have already obtained divorce by way of mutual consent on 18.12.2025 and have also settled their other connected matters.
6. Respondent No.2 has received a sum of Rs.40 lacs as full and final settlement in lieu of istridhan, alimony, maintenance for self (past, present and future) and as per settlement, the custody of daughter shall remain with respondent No.2, with no visitation right to the other side. 
7. Respondent No.2 has joined the proceedings through video-conferencing from the chamber of her advocate and she has been duly identified by her counsel as well as the Investigating Officer, who is present in Court. 
8. Upon query, respondent No.2 has reiterated the terms and conditions of the settlement and submits that in view of such settlement, she is no longer interested in pursuing with instant FIR. 
9. Petitioner No.1 and his mother are present in person and they also assure that they would abide by the terms of Memorandum of Understanding dated 23.09.2025.
10. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with 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 petitioners. 
11. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
12. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 95/2024 dated 15.04.2024, registered at P.S. Najaf Garh, for commission of offences under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed.
13. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
14. Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. 


(MANOJ JAIN)                                                                                 JUDGE
FEBRUARY 02, 2026/st/js






CRL.M.C. 602/2026                                                      	         1