$~56 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5173/2026, CRL.M.A. 21715/2026-Exp SUHAIL AHMED AND OTHERS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Faiz Imam, Adv. alongwith petitioners in person versus STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI AND ANOTHER .....Respondents Through: Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for the State with Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh and Ms. Upasna Bakshi, Advs. alongwith SI Kuldeep, PS Raj Park Respondent no.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE O R D E R % 24.07.2026 1. By virtue of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the petitioners seek quashing of the FIR No.673/2023 dated 30.10.2023 registered at PS.: Raj Park, District-Outer (Delhi) under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and all proceedings emanating therefrom in view of Counselling Cell Settlement dated 05.04.2025 (Annexure P3). 2. Issue notice. 3. Learned APP accepts notice and submits that he has no objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/07/2026 at 11:18:56 4. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 also accepts notice and submits that the respondent no.2 has no objection if the present petition is allowed. 5. This Court has further had the occasion of interacting with the petitioners as well as the respondent no.2, who all are present in Court. They affirm the terms of the aforesaid Counselling Cell Settlement dated 05.04.2025, and in pursuance whereof, the petitioners have already paid her the settlement amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as full and final settlement of all her present, past and future claims including alimony, maintenance, etc. As such, the parties have agreed to put a quietus to their disputes. Hence, respondent no.2 submits that she does not wish to continue the aforesaid FIR against the petitioners. 6. The petitioners and the respondent no.2, present in Court, as well as their credentials as on record, have been identified by the Investigating Officer. 7. As noted above, a settlement based on mutual terms between the petitioners and the respondent no.2 is the basis of filing the present petition, which is accompanied by their respective affidavit(s) qua the said effect. In view thereof, the present is a fit case for quashing the aforesaid FIR. Accordingly, as also following the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. vs. Babita Raguvanshi & Anr.: (2013) 4 SCC 58, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr.: (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr.: (2014) 6 SCC 466, and also since there is nothing left to corroborate and prove the case of the prosecution, continuation of the present FIR will be an exercise in futility. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/07/2026 at 11:18:56 8. Therefore, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.673/2023 dated 30.10.2023 registered at PS.: Raj Park, District-Outer (Delhi) under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC as also all proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed. 9. Accordingly, the present petition, alongwith the pending application, is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. SAURABH BANERJEE, J JULY 24, 2026/rr This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/07/2026 at 11:18:56