MOHIT GAUBA & ORS. v. STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) & ANR.
Delhi High Court quashes Section 498A/406 IPC FIR after complainant wife settles disputes with husband and family
The court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 50/2023 of PS CWC Nanakpura under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings arising from it, since the complainant had compromised the disputes and the State had no objection.
Why it matters: Shows the High Court quashing a matrimonial FIR on the basis of a compromise, after speaking with the complainant, to avoid 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. - 6294/2026
- Date of judgment
- 29 October 2026
- Petitioner / Appellant
- MOHIT GAUBA & ORS.
- Respondent
- STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) & ANR.
- CNR
- DLHC010399752026
- Outcome
- Allowed
CRL.M.C. 6294/2026 Page 1 of 2 pages $~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 29.10.2026 # CNR No. DLHC010399752026 + CRL.M.C. 6294/2026 MOHIT GAUBA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Amit Kumar Rohela and Mr. Adil Kumar, Advocates with petitioners.
versus
STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State with Ms. Megha Garg, Advocate with IO/ASI Om Prakash.
Mr. Prakash Sharma, Advocate with
R-2.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. Petitioners seek quashing of case FIR No. 50/2023 of PS CWC Nanakpura 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. 6294/2026 Page 2 of 2 pages 3. The respondent no.2 is present in court today and is identified by IO/ASI Om Prakash. 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 the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 stands already dissolved by way of decree of divorce. One female child was born from the wedlock of petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, who is in the care and custody of 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 FIR No. 50/2023 of PS CWC Nanakpura for offence under Section 498A/406/34 IPC as well as proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
OCTOBER 29, 2026/dr