$~64
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
%					       Date of Decision: 12th January, 2026
+ 	CRL.M.C. 222/2026 & CRL.M.A. 838/2026 & CRL.M.A. 839/2026
	ABHISHEK KUMAR & ORS.
.....Petitioner
Through:	Mr. Ravi Bhushan, Advocate through V.C.

				versus

	THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
.....Respondent
Through:	Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State with SI Sachin Kumar.
	Mr. Dinesh Kumar Chawla, Advocate for R-2 along with respondent No.2 in person.

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

1. Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No. 1357/2015 dated 21.12.2020, registered at P.S. Amar Colony, under Section 406 IPC, along with consequential proceedings arising therefrom, based on compromise arrived at between the parties. 
2. Respondent no.2 was married to petitioner no.1 on 28.06.2012 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. 
3. It is submitted that another FIR was also registered bearing No. 85/2014 at P.S. Dumra, District Sitamarhi, for commission of offence under Section 498A IPC as well as under Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Admittedly, the abovesaid case resulted in conviction, fact remains that in view of the compromise, even the said proceedings stand quashed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Revision No. 101/2021 vide order dated 23.08.2022.
4. The parties have, even, obtained a decree of divorce vide judgment dated 28.06.2021.   
5. Parties are present through video-conferencing and the Court has interacted with them.
6. Upon query to respondent No.2, she submits that she is a a practicing Advocate and has entered into the settlement voluntarily, and without any undue influence or coercion. She further states that she has also received the entire settlement amount of Rs. 30 lacs in lieu of maintenance, istridhan, alimony and therefore, would have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.
7. There is no off-spring from the wedlock in question.
8. The charge-sheet has reportedly been filed, however, charges have not been ascertained yet.
9. Petitioner No.1-Mr. Abhishek Kumar is, reportedly, working in Kolkata and has joined the proceedings through video-conferencing.
10. His mother (petitioner No.3) is stated to be unwell and, therefore, has been taken to hospital and resultantly, his parents are unable to join the proceedings.   
11. The Investigating Officer (I.O.) is present and confirms the broad facts and identifies the complainant.
12. 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 private in nature. In any case, even the complainant does not wish to press any charges against the petitioners. 
13. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
14. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 1357/2015 dated 21.12.2020, registered at P.S. Amar Colony, under Section 406 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed.
15. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.


(MANOJ JAIN)                                                                                 JUDGE
JANUARY 12, 2026/ss/sa






CRL.M.C. 222/2026                                                      1