A matrimonial FIR may be quashed on voluntary settlement securing residence and property rights for the wife and children.

The petitioners sought quashing under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, of FIR No. 391/2021, registered at P.S. Begum Pur under Sections 498A, 406 and 34 IPC, and the consequential proceedings

The petitioners, who were the in-laws of respondent no. 2, relied on a settlement agreement dated 6 April 2026, reached under the aegis of the Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini District Courts

The husband had died; petitioner no. 5 had also expired and was directed to be deleted from the array of parties

Respondent no. 2 and the petitioners appeared in Court, and respondent no. 2 confirmed that the settlement was voluntary and supported quashing of the FIR

Whether the FIR and consequential proceedings arising from the matrimonial dispute could be quashed on the basis of the parties’ settlement

Whether the settlement was voluntary and sufficient, in the circumstances of the case, to warrant quashing

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, provides the procedural basis invoked for the quashing petition

The FIR alleged offences under Sections 498A, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

Applying Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Court may quash criminal proceedings arising from a matrimonial dispute where the parties have settled and quashing is appropriate in the circumstances

The Court found that the parties had resolved their dispute through the settlement agreement and that respondent no. 2, appearing before the Court, affirmed that she had entered into it of her own free will, without coercion or undue influence, and sought quashing

The Court also considered the matrimonial nature of the dispute, the husband’s death, and the settlement’s provision for residence and a share in property for respondent no. 2 and her children.

In light of those circumstances and Gian Singh, it found no impediment to quashing the FIR

Petitioner no. 5 was deleted from the array of parties, and the petitioners were directed to file an amended memo of parties within one week

The petition was disposed of accordingly