CRL.M.C. 5298/2026 Page 1 of 3 pages $~72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 28.07.2026 + CRL.M.C. 5298/2026 & CRL.M.A. 22189/2026 ANITA .....Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person. versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State with SI Ravi Shankar. CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA J U D G M E N T (ORAL) 1. Petitioner (complainant de facto) seeks quashing of case FIR No. 229/2016 of PS Ashok Vihar for offence under Section 498A/406/34 IPC on merits. 2. Broadly speaking, the petitioner filed a complaint before PS Ashok Vihar, which was registered as FIR No. 229/2016 for offence under Section 498A/406/34 IPC against the present respondents no.2-5. Now, petitioner seeks quashing of that FIR. GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d4 35f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee6 0402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.07.28 14:32:36 +05'30' Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Date:28.07.2026 14:45:24 Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 5298/2026 Page 2 of 3 pages 3. Petitioner has opted to pursue this petition in person and it is stated by her that the petition was drafted by her on her own. Going by the contents of the petition, I am satisfied that petitioner can present her case without any advocate, as she herself opts for. 4. I have heard the petitioner at length. It is submitted by her that she has not compromised the disputes with the private respondents, but she does not wish to continue their prosecution, because her marriage with respondent no.2 stands dissolved by way of decree of divorce. It is submitted by her that her first marriage got dissolved by divorce because her husband was impotent and thereafter, she got married with the present respondent no.2. The petitioner further submits that her chief-examination has been recorded by the trial court partly but she does not wish to record her complete testimony. 5. Learned APP for State assisted by IO/SI Ravi Shankar accepts notice and opposes the petition. 6. It is not a case where quashing of FIR is sought on merits or on the basis of settlement between the parties. It is a case where the complainant de facto, whose role is no more than a witness of prosecution, seeks quashing of the FIR. The petitioner does not have a locus standi to seek quashing of the present FIR. Further, if such kind of petition is allowed, it would take GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4 835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd 2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.07.28 14:32:48 +05'30' Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Date:28.07.2026 14:45:24 Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 5298/2026 Page 3 of 3 pages away from the private respondents an occasion to claim damages for malicious prosecution, in case it is so made out after conclusion of their trial. It is for this reason that complainant de facto cannot bring such petition, especially where the prosecution does not support the same. 7. The petition is completely devoid of locus standi as well as merits, so the same is dismissed. Accompanying application also stands disposed of. GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) JULY 28, 2026/dr GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afe c45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1 5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff8 01e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.07.28 14:33:03 +05'30' By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Date:28.07.2026 14:45:24