Parties Have “Happily Parted As Friends”: MP High Court Quashes 498-A FIR After Divorce Compromise Decree

The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur has quashed a matrimonial cruelty FIR lodged by a wife against her husband, observing that continuing criminal proceedings after the couple had divorced by mutual consent and settled their disputes would be “counterproductive to the interest of justice.”

A single bench of Justice Vivek Jain passed the order on October 15 while allowing a petition filed by Nalin Mishra under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). He had sought quashing of the FIR registered at Crime No. 433/2024 at Police Station Morwa in Singrauli district under Sections 498-A, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Advocate Manan Agrawal appeared for the petitioner husband, who sought to bring the case to an end.

Notably, this was the husband’s second attempt to have the FIR quashed. The court recorded that the order in his first petition had been duly disclosed by his counsel. That earlier petition, M.Cr.C. No. 31185 of 2024, was dismissed on merits by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court on July 27, 2026.

The husband, however, contended that in the first round, the fact that the parties had reached a compromise and obtained a decree of divorce could not be brought to the notice of the court. He argued that, since a compromise decree now existed, it would be “in the fitness of things” for the pending FIR under Section 498-A to be put to an end.

Advocate Shubham Mishra, appearing for the wife, “categorically stated” that she had no objection if the FIR was quashed, as the matter had been compromised and the marriage had ended in divorce by consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Government Advocate Sumit Raghuvanshi appeared for the State.

The bench went through the compromise decree passed by the Family Court at Rae Bareli in Uttar Pradesh, in Matrimonial Case No. 506 of 2025. The Family Court had granted the divorce on May 15, 2025, on the basis of the parties’ compromise.

The court took note of condition (c) of that decree. As reproduced in the order, the clause provided that the wife agreed to withdraw all cases, complaints and judicial proceedings she had filed against the husband.

The court also noted that permanent alimony had been settled between the parties and had already been paid to the wife in terms of the divorce decree.

Describing the case as “a matrimonial dispute basically under Section 498-A IPC,” the court observed that the compromise had been brought on record and had also been recorded by the Family Court itself while granting divorce by mutual consent. It highlighted the “categorical assertion” in the decree that the wife would withdraw all complaints and proceedings instituted against the husband.

Justice Jain then turned to the larger question of whether the prosecution should continue. “As the marriage has already come to an end and the parties to the marriage have already happily parted as friends, therefore, further continuation of criminal proceedings would not be in the interest of justice and would in fact be counterproductive to the interest of justice,” the court said.

Concluding that the dispute stood fully resolved, the bench held that the FIR deserved to be quashed. “In view of the aforesaid and in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties which has been recorded in the divorce decree issued by mutual consent, this Court is of the considered opinion that the FIR at Crime No. 433/2024 registered at police station Morwa, District Singrauli be quashed,” it said.

The court further directed that all consequential proceedings emanating from the FIR would also stand quashed, and disposed of the petition as allowed.

Case Title: Nalin Mishra vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others

Order Date: October 15, 2026

Bench: Justice Vivek Jain