MANUJ GUPTA AND ORS v. STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR
Delhi High Court quashes Section 498A/406 IPC FIR after complainant wife settles disputes with husband's side
The High Court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 875/2024 of PS North Rohini under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, with all proceedings arising from it. It relied on the compromise, the State's lack of objection, and the complainant's statement that she did not wish to pursue the case.
Why it matters: Shows the court quashing a matrimonial-cruelty FIR on settlement, after personally confirming the complainant's consent, so the parties are spared a full trial.
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. - 716/2026
- Date of judgment
- 2 November 2026
- Petitioner / Appellant
- MANUJ GUPTA AND ORS
- Respondent
- STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR
- CNR
- DLHC010025542026
- Outcome
- Allowed
CRL.M.C. 716/2026 Page 1 of 2 pages $~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 02.11.2026 # CNR No. DLHC010025542026 + CRL.M.C. 716/2026 MANUJ GUPTA AND ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Uday Garg, Advocate ( through videoconferencing).
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for State with IO/SI Ritu.
R-2 appearing through video
conferencing.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. Petitioners seek quashing of case FIR No. 875/2024 of PS North Rohini 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. 716/2026 Page 2 of 2 pages
3. The respondent no.2 is present through videoconferencing today and is identified by IO/SI Ritu. 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. Two children were born from the wedlock of petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, who are in the care and custody of the petitioner no.1. 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 FIR No. 875/2024 of PS North Rohini for offence under Section 498A/406/34 IPC as well as proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
NOVEMBER 02, 2026/dr