$~51
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
%					       Date of Decision: 28th January, 2026
+ 	W.P.(CRL) 287/2026, CRL.M.A. 2801/2026 & CRL.M.A. 2802/2026
	AZIZ AHMAD AND ORS				.....Petitioners
				Through:	Mr. Purushottam Kaushik, Advocate 							with petitioner No.1 in person and 							petitioner Nos.2 to 5 through V.C.
				versus

	THE STATE OF DELHI AND ANOTHER		.....Respondent
				Through:	Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel 							(Crl.) for State with SI Deepak Kumar, 						Ms. Chinki Guliya, Advocate 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)

1. Petitioners herein seek quashing of FIR No. 526/2020 dated 21.10.2020, registered at P.S. Jahangir Puri, Delhi, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.
2. The marriage between complainant (respondent No.2 herein) and petitioner No.1 was solemnized on 01.02.2020 according to Muslim rites and customs. They, however, started living separately within few months of their marriage.  
3. Fact, however, remains that on the basis of the complaint made by respondent No.2, the abovesaid FIR was registered on 21.10.2020.
4.  Charge-sheet has yet not been filed.  
5. The parties have, however, with the intervention of their family members and common friends have reached at an amicable settlement.  Copy of such Settlement Deed dated 13.10.2025 has also been placed on record and, in terms of settlement, the parties approached Family Court and vide order dated 14.11.2025, the marriage between them has been declared to be dissolved by way of mutual consent/Mubarat.  The parties have a daughter from the abovesaid wedlock and as per settlement, the custody of the daughter would remain with mother, with no visitation rights to petitioner No.1. 
6. Petitioner No.1 is present whereas petitioner Nos.2 to 5 have appeared through video-conferencing. 
7. Respondent No.2 is present and is represented by her counsel.  
8. When asked, respondent No.2 has reiterated the terms and conditions of the settlement and submits that in view of the settlement, she is no longer interested in pursuing with instant FIR and would have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. 
9. The Investigating Officer (I.O.) is present and identifies her.
10. Respondent No.2 has also agreed to accept a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- as full and final settlement in lieu of alimony, istridhan, maintenance for self (past, present and future). She has already received a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- and the balance amount of Rs.50,000/- has been received by her today during the course of proceedings, by way of Demand Draft bearing No. 629215 dated 08.12.2025 drawn on Canara Bank. 
11. 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. 
12. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
13. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 526/2020 dated 21.10.2020, registered at P.S. Jahangir Puri, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is hereby, quashed.
14. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. 
15. Pending applications also stand disposed of in aforesaid terms. 


(MANOJ JAIN)                                                                                 JUDGE
JANUARY 28, 2026
st/js


W.P.(CRL) 287/2026						    1