Headnote
AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved
The Petitioners, husband and father-in-law, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of FIR No. 467/2016 dated 18.05.2016 registered at PS Hauz Khas under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all consequential proceedings. The FIR arose from a complaint filed by Respondent No. 2/Kavita Nigam, wife of Petitioner No. 1, following matrimonial discord after she left the matrimonial home in April 2011. The Petitioners contended that the FIR was filed with mala fide intent to harass and extort money and property from them, and that the allegations were identical and omnibus to those raised in earlier Domestic Violence proceedings.
The background involved parallel proceedings including a Domestic Violence complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, wherein the learned Magistrate vide order dated 17.07.2020 found no act of domestic violence proved against the parents-in-law and discharged them, though granting monetary and compensatory relief against the husband. A divorce petition filed by the husband under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was also pending before the Family Court, Saket. Additionally, a civil suit for possession and injunction filed by the Petitioner's parents was decreed on 01.12.2021, and the Respondent-Wife was subsequently evicted in execution proceedings.
The case raises questions regarding the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 read with Section 482 CrPC for quashing of FIR in matrimonial disputes, the standard for determining whether criminal proceedings constitute an abuse of process, and the effect of parallel civil and domestic violence proceedings on the continuation of criminal prosecution under Sections 498A and 406 IPC.
Catchwords:
quashing of FIR · matrimonial dispute · Section 498A IPC · Section 406 IPC · cruelty · criminal breach of trust · Domestic Violence Act · abuse of process · Article 226 · Section 482 CrPC · mala fide prosecution · omnibus allegations · Hindu Marriage Act
Headnote © LegalFirms.in. Section 52(1)(q)(iv) of the Copyright Act, 1957 allows a court's
judgment to be reproduced unless the court has prohibited it.
Full Judgment Text
[Cites 29, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Aditya Mohan Nigam & Anr vs The State Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 8 January, 2026
Author: Neena Bansal Krishna
Bench: Neena Bansal Krishna
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Reserved on: 16th October, 2025
Pronounced on: 08th January, 2026
+ W.P. (CRL) 353/2024, CRL.M.A.3284/2024
1. ADITYA MOHAN NIGAM
S/o Sh. Ashok Nigam
R/o Flat no. 66 A, Pocket-IV,
Mayur Vihar, Phase-I,
Delhi-110092
Email: [email? protected]
Mobile: 9899063164
2. ASHOK NIGAM
s/o Late Sh. M.L. Nigam
R/o House no. Q-2A, Hauz Khas Enclave
New Delhi-110016
....
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools.
For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.