DEEPAK AND ORS v. GOV OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR
Delhi High Court quashes 2016 Section 498A/406 IPC FIR after complainant wife settles disputes with husband and others
The High Court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 521/2016 of PS Gandhi Nagar under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, and all proceedings arising from it, on the basis of the compromise between the parties. The State had no objection.
Why it matters: Shows the court quashing a matrimonial-cruelty FIR on settlement, after the marriage had ended in divorce and the complainant confirmed the compromise.
Summary written with AI and checked against the judgment text. It is not part of the judgment; read the full text or PDF.- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Case number
- CRL.M.C. - 6230/2026
- Date of judgment
- 30 October 2026
- Petitioner / Appellant
- DEEPAK AND ORS
- Respondent
- GOV OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR
- CNR
- DLHC010396422026
- Outcome
- Allowed
CRL.M.C. 6230/2026 Page 1 of 2 pages $~48 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 30.10.2026 # CNR No. DLHC010396422026 + CRL.M.C. 6230/2026 DEEPAK AND ORS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Satish Kumar Yadav, Advocate with petitioners in person
versus
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State with SI Sanjeev Kumar Respondent no. 2 in person
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. Petitioners seek quashing of case FIR No. 521/2016 of PS Gandhi Nagar for offence under Section 498A/406/34 IPC on the ground that the complainant de facto (respondent no.2) has compromised the disputes with the petitioners.
2. State has no objection to this petition. Statements of parties have already been recorded by the concerned Joint Registrar.
CRL.M.C. 6230/2026 Page 2 of 2 pages
3. The respondent no.2 is present today through videoconferencing and is identified by IO/SI Sanjeev Kumar. I have spoken with respondent no.2 in Hindi and it is stated by her that she has compromised all disputes with the petitioners. Marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 stands already dissolved by way of decree of divorce. No child was born from the wedlock of petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2. The respondent no.2 submits that she has received complete full and final settlement amount in lieu of her entire stridhan and maintenance. Respondent no.2 submits that now she does not wish to continue prosecution of petitioners.
4. Having spoken with respondent no.2, I am satisfied that it would be in the interest of justice not to push the parties through full dress trial.
5. Therefore, the petition is allowed and FIR No. 521/2016 of PS Gandhi Nagar for offence under Section 498A/406/34 IPC as well as proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
OCTOBER 30, 2026/as