$~39 & 51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 31st August, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC010406842026 + CRL.M.C. 6394/2026&CRL.M.A. 26741-26742/2026 TUSHAR GARG .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mishal Johari, Mr. Manish Kaushik and Mr. Mainak Sarkar, Advocates. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for the State. SI Deepak Sahu, PS: Punjabi Bagh. Mr. Soutik Banerjee, Advocate for R-2 with R-2 in person. # CNR No. DLHC010318442026 + CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 &CRL.M.A. 21290-21291/2026 TUSHAR GARG .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mishal Johari, Mr. Manish Kaushik and Mr. Mainak Sarkar, Advocates. versus STATE OF (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State. CRL.M.C. 6394/2026 & CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 Page 1 of 4 Mr. Soutik Banerjee, Advocate for R-2 with R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Both the petitions, being connected, have been taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. As per the averments made in the petitions, Petitioner herein-Tushar Garg got married to Respondent No. 2-Ms. Nikita Bansal on 17.02.2018, as per Hindu rites and customs. The couple was blessed with a baby boy on 02.04.2022.

3. However, on account of there being compatibility issues, they started residing separately from each other with effect from 06.05.2025. On the basis of complaint made by Respondent No. 2, FIR No. 693/2025 (in CRL.M.C. 6394/2026) was registered at P.S. Punjabi Bagh for commission of offences under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC. 4. In such abovesaid FIR, respondent No.2 has made allegations against her husband and also against her other relatives. 5. Matter is still, however, at the investigational stage. 6. The other FIR i.e. FIR No.331/2026 (in CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 ) has also been registered at P.S. Punjabi Bagh, for commission of offences under Sections 420/406/467/478/471 IPC read with Section 120B IPC and the broad allegations are with respect to sale of vehicle in an unauthorised manner which was stated to be part of her istridhan. 7. Fact, however, remains that parties have amicably settled all their CRL.M.C. 6394/2026 & CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 Page 2 of 4 disputes and have entered into a comprehensive Settlement Agreement dated 12.07.2026. 8. Copy of such Settlement Agreement has been placed on record. 9. It is informed that pursuant to the above Settlement Agreement, the civil matters (one guardianship petition, two petitions filed under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and one complaint filed under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (PWDV) Act, 2005 have already been withdrawn. They have also agreed to take divorce by way of mutual consent.

10. Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and has been duly identified by the IO as well as by her counsel. 11. When asked, she reiterated that both the matters have been amicably settled and she would have ‘no objection’ if both FIRs in question are quashed in toto. She submits that she does not want any action against any of the accused in view of the fact that she has settled all her disputes with her husband and has agreed to take divorce by way of mutual consent. She also submits that as per the terms of settlement, their son would remain in her custody only and her husband has relinquished all his rights with respect to visitation and custody. Respondent No. 2 submits that with respect to the car/vehicle in question also, she is left with no grievance and that she has also waived-off all her rights with respect to maintenance, alimony and istridhan, albeit, such agreement would not have any adverse impact over the rights of their son. 12. Both the sides, Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2, who are present in-person, undertake to adhere to the terms of the settlement in its true letter and spirit. 13. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with CRL.M.C. 6394/2026 & CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 Page 3 of 4 criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when dispute does not involve any public interest and is, primarily, private in nature. In any case, even the complainant does not wish to press any charges against the petitioners.

14. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, it is deemed appropriate to quash both the above FIRs. 15. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, both the FIRs in question i.e. FIR No. 693/2025 and FIR No.331/2026, registered at Police Station Punjabi Bagh, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are, hereby, quashed. 16. Settlement Agreement and original affidavits of the parties, copies of which have been placed on record in the present proceedings, shall be submitted to concerned SHO/IO within four weeks from today. 17. The petitions stand disposed of in aforesaid terms. 18. Pending applications also stand disposed of. (MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE AUGUST 31, 2026 d.negi/sa CRL.M.C. 6394/2026 & CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 Page 4 of 4

$~39 & 51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 31st August, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC010406842026 + CRL.M.C. 6394/2026&CRL.M.A. 26741-26742/2026 TUSHAR GARG .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mishal Johari, Mr. Manish Kaushik and Mr. Mainak Sarkar, Advocates. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for the State. SI Deepak Sahu, PS: Punjabi Bagh. Mr. Soutik Banerjee, Advocate for R-2 with R-2 in person. # CNR No. DLHC010318442026 + CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 &CRL.M.A. 21290-21291/2026 TUSHAR GARG .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mishal Johari, Mr. Manish Kaushik and Mr. Mainak Sarkar, Advocates. versus STATE OF (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State. CRL.M.C. 6394/2026 & CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 Page 1 of 4 Mr. Soutik Banerjee, Advocate for R-2 with R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Both the petitions, being connected, have been taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. As per the averments made in the petitions, Petitioner herein-Tushar Garg got married to Respondent No. 2-Ms. Nikita Bansal on 17.02.2018, as per Hindu rites and customs. The couple was blessed with a baby boy on 02.04.2022.

3. However, on account of there being compatibility issues, they started residing separately from each other with effect from 06.05.2025. On the basis of complaint made by Respondent No. 2, FIR No. 693/2025 (in CRL.M.C. 6394/2026) was registered at P.S. Punjabi Bagh for commission of offences under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC. 4. In such abovesaid FIR, respondent No.2 has made allegations against her husband and also against her other relatives. 5. Matter is still, however, at the investigational stage. 6. The other FIR i.e. FIR No.331/2026 (in CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 ) has also been registered at P.S. Punjabi Bagh, for commission of offences under Sections 420/406/467/478/471 IPC read with Section 120B IPC and the broad allegations are with respect to sale of vehicle in an unauthorised manner which was stated to be part of her istridhan. 7. Fact, however, remains that parties have amicably settled all their CRL.M.C. 6394/2026 & CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 Page 2 of 4 disputes and have entered into a comprehensive Settlement Agreement dated 12.07.2026. 8. Copy of such Settlement Agreement has been placed on record. 9. It is informed that pursuant to the above Settlement Agreement, the civil matters (one guardianship petition, two petitions filed under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and one complaint filed under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (PWDV) Act, 2005 have already been withdrawn. They have also agreed to take divorce by way of mutual consent.

10. Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and has been duly identified by the IO as well as by her counsel. 11. When asked, she reiterated that both the matters have been amicably settled and she would have ‘no objection’ if both FIRs in question are quashed in toto. She submits that she does not want any action against any of the accused in view of the fact that she has settled all her disputes with her husband and has agreed to take divorce by way of mutual consent. She also submits that as per the terms of settlement, their son would remain in her custody only and her husband has relinquished all his rights with respect to visitation and custody. Respondent No. 2 submits that with respect to the car/vehicle in question also, she is left with no grievance and that she has also waived-off all her rights with respect to maintenance, alimony and istridhan, albeit, such agreement would not have any adverse impact over the rights of their son. 12. Both the sides, Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2, who are present in-person, undertake to adhere to the terms of the settlement in its true letter and spirit. 13. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with CRL.M.C. 6394/2026 & CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 Page 3 of 4 criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, especially, when dispute does not involve any public interest and is, primarily, private in nature. In any case, even the complainant does not wish to press any charges against the petitioners.

14. Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, it is deemed appropriate to quash both the above FIRs. 15. Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, both the FIRs in question i.e. FIR No. 693/2025 and FIR No.331/2026, registered at Police Station Punjabi Bagh, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are, hereby, quashed. 16. Settlement Agreement and original affidavits of the parties, copies of which have been placed on record in the present proceedings, shall be submitted to concerned SHO/IO within four weeks from today. 17. The petitions stand disposed of in aforesaid terms. 18. Pending applications also stand disposed of. (MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE AUGUST 31, 2026 d.negi/sa CRL.M.C. 6394/2026 & CRL.M.C. 5078/2026 Page 4 of 4