$~46 and 61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 17th February, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 1250/2026 VIRENDER CHHABRA @ VICKY & ORS. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vikas Chada with Mr. Rahul Saini, Ms. Devanjali, Mr. Amit Bhati, Advocates. versus STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP with SI Hurtej Singh. + CRL.M.C. 1341/2026&CRL.M.A. 5366/2026 SUNIL CHHABRA & ORS. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vikas Chada with Mr. Rahul Saini, Ms. Devanjali, Mr. Amit Bhati, Advocates. versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP with SI Hurtej Singh. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Both the petitions, being connected, have been taken up together. 2. Petitioners, in said two petitions, seek quashing of FIR No. 493/2016 dated 23.07.2016, registered at PS Binda Pur, Delhi, for commission of offences under Sections 323/354-B/34 IPC and of FIR No. 30/2017 dated 26.01.2017, registered at P.S. Shalimar Bagh, Delhi, for commission of offences under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties. 3. Marriage between petitioner No.1- Sunil Chhabra (in Crl.M.C. 1341/2026) and Respondent No.2 was solemnized on 17.04.2008, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. However, due to certain temperamental differences, the parties started living separately w.e.f. year 2016. 4. Respondent No.2 reported the matters to the police, which resulted in registration of abovesaid two FIRs. 5. As far as FIR No. 493/2016 is concerned, it is directed against her husband, brother-in-law and parents-in-law. Her father-in-law has however, already expired and as per the allegations appearing in the FIR, she had been kicked and pushed by her brother-in-law inappropriately and was also assaulted at the hands of other accused persons. The other FIR is against her husband, mother-in-law and brother-in-law, in which she has come up with allegations of cruelty and misappropriation of her istridhan. 6. Charge-sheet has already been filed in both the matters and both the cases are at the stage of prosecution evidence. 7. Respondent No.2 had filed one complaint under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and on request of the parties, the matter was referred by the learned Magisterial Court to Mediation Centre, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi, where the parties were able to resolve all their disputes. Terms of settlement are found recorded in mediation order dated 16.02.2023. 8. Petitioner No.1- Sunil Chhabra submits that there would be due adherence to the abovesaid terms of settlement. He submits that the FDRs worth Rs. 4,00,000/- in the name of their daughter had already been prepared, copies of which were handed over to respondent No.2. He also submits that he would continue to make payment of Rs. 25,000/- per month to his wife to enable her to take care of house-hold expenses. 9. As per the abovesaid settlement, the parties have decided to live together along with their daughter on one floor of the matrimonial house. When asked, respondent No.2 apprised that it is second floor of Q-6, Vikas Vihar, Manas Kunj Road, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-l10059, which comprises of three rooms, besides kitchen and washroom. 10. When the matter was taken up on the last date i.e. on 13.02.2026, at the request of respondent No.2, the matter was adjourned for today, with direction to verify the above FDRs. IO submits that FDRs are genuine. 11. Respondent No.2 submits that she would have no objection if the FIRs in question are quashed. She submits that she has entered into settlement voluntarily and without any force or coercion and does not want any action against anyone. Her affidavit to the abovesaid effect is also on record. 12. The Investigating Officer (I.O.) is present and duly identifies her. 13. All the other cases between the parties in relation to the abovesaid marriage have already been withdrawn by respective parties and as per settlement, the parties are staying together. 14. 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 and matrimonial in nature. In any case, even the complainant does not wish to press any charges against the petitioners and as noted already, all the matrimonial disputes have been patched up and parties are now living together, under one roof. 15. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIRs. 16. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 493/2016 dated 23.07.2016, registered at PS Binda Pur, Delhi, for commission of offences under Sections 323/354-B/34 IPC and FIR No. 30/2017 dated 26.01.2017, registered at P.S. Shalimar Bagh, Delhi, for commission of offences under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, are hereby, quashed. 17. However, it is made clear that the abovesaid FDRs shall not be got prematurely encashed by petitioner No.1- Sunil Chhabra and the amount under the abovesaid FDR, with the accrued interest, would go to the daughter of the petitioner No.1- Sunil Chhabra and respondent No.2, once she attains majority. 18. Copy of this order be given dasti to the IO who would hand over the same to the concerned Brach Manager of ICICI Bank so that there is no pre-mature encashment of the abovesaid FDRs. 19. The petitions stand disposed of in aforesaid terms. 20. Pending applications also stand disposed of in aforesaid terms. (MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE FEBRUARY 17, 2026/sw/js CRL.M.C. 1250/2026 & CRL.M.C. 1341/2026 1