$~67
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
%					       Date of Decision: 16th January, 2026
+ 	CRL.M.C. 389/2026 

	AATMA RAM DUBEY					.....Petitioner
				Through:	Mr. Manish Kumar with Mr. Jitendra 							Kumar Singh, Advocates with 							petitioner in person.
				versus

	THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.		.....Respondents
				Through:	Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP for the 						State with SI Kailash Chand, PS 							Jaipur.
						Mr. A.K. Rai with Ms. Pooja, 							Advocates for respondent No.2 with 							respondent No.2 in person. 
	CORAM:
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
				J U D G M E N T (oral)

CRL.M.A. 1466/2026 (exemption)

	Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. 

CRL.M.C. 389/2026
1. The present petition seeks quashing of FIR No.643/2018 dated 20.10.2018, registered at P.S. Jait Pur, Delhi for commission of offences under Sections 354/354(A)/506 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.
2. Respondent No.2 got married to Sh. Uma Shankar Dubey (son of petitioner) on 01.02.2017, as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. 
3. However, on account of matrimonial discord, the couple started living separately with effect from November, 2018. 
4. In the interregnum, a complaint was also filed by respondent No.2 under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, (PWDV) 2005. 
5. She also, however, made a complaint against her father-in-law for his inappropriate conduct, which resulted in the registration of FIR in question.  
6. It is now reported by both sides that all matters relating to marriage in question have been amicably resolved, and the parties have even obtained decree of divorce by way of mutual consent.  It is submitted that pursuant to the settlement, the complainant is no longer desirous of pursuing her abovesaid complaint, and prays that instant FIR be quashed.  
7. The settlement took place under the aegis of Mediation Centre, Saket, New Delhi on 27.10.2021 and in such settlement also, the complainant had agreed to cooperate for the purposes of quashing of FIR in question. 
8. Respondent No.2 is present in Court along with her counsel. Investigating Officer is also present and duly identifies the complainant.
9. Upon query, respondent No.2 reiterated the terms of settlement, and in her affidavit also, she has submitted that she would have no objection if the proceedings arising out of the abovesaid FIR against her father-in-law are quashed.  She further submits that at present, no other litigation of any nature, is pending in relation to her marriage. 
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. 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.643/2018 dated 20.10.2018, registered at P.S. Jait Pur, Delhi for commission of offences under Sections 354/354(A)/506 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed.
13. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. 

(MANOJ JAIN)                                                                                 JUDGE
JANUARY 16, 2026
st/sa






CRL.M.C. 389/2026                                                   	        1