Bombay High Court
YASH RAJESH KAMBLEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The High Court quashed the FIR and all consequent proceedings, finding that the applicant's act lacked criminal intent and warranted a reformative approach.
Summary
The applicant, a 19‑year‑old student, was charged under criminal intimidation for brandishing a sword when a mob of 15‑20 persons entered his home during a family feud. He claimed the sword was an award displayed at his house and was used solely to ward off the mob, with no intent to cause harm and no injury inflicted. The court examined the circumstances, noting the applicant's young age, lack of prior record, and the absence of premeditation, and emphasized the need for reformative rather than punitive measures for youthful offenders. Considering these factors, the court found that the FIR and related proceedings were not justified in the interest of justice. Consequently, the application to quash the FIR was allowed, the proceedings were dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay costs of Rs.10,000 to the Bar Council Aid Fund.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR under criminal intimidation should be quashed on the ground of lack of criminal intent and the applicant's youthful age.
- Whether proceeding with the case would be contrary to the principles of reformative justice for a first‑time youthful offender.
- Whether the applicant should be liable to pay costs despite the quashing of the FIR.
Subjects
- criminal intimidation
- quash FIR
- juvenile offender
- reformative justice
- brandishing weapon
- police clearance certificate
- costs order
Judgment
31apl-1466-26.doc
Urmila Ingale
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1466 OF 2026
Yash Rajesh Kamble .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and anr. .. Respondents
....................
Ms. Yayatri Nayak a/w Ms.Lubdha Bhoir, Mr. Akash Tayade, Mr.
vinit Dotre, Mr. Raj Gupta h/f Mr. Rajesh Khobragade, Advocates
for Applicant.
Ms. R.V.Newton, APP for Respondent-State.
PSI- Ms. Shamali N. Joshi, Pairavi Officer, Dadar Police Station,
present.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 21, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Ms. Nayak, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms.
Newton, learned APP for Respondent-State.
2. By this Criminal Application, Applicant is seeking quashing
and setting aside the FIR bearing C.R.No. 56 of 2015 registered with
Dadar Police Station, Mumbai and for all consequent proceedings in
C.C.No.1204/PW/2016 pending before Ld. Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Dadar, Mumbai, as against the
Applicant.
3. The incident is of 06.06.2014. Precursor to the incident is a
quarrel between the Waghmare and the Kharat family residing in
Wadala chawl where they had rooms adjacent to each other. The
1 of 6
31apl-1466-26.doc
Applicant was 19 years old boy studying in the XII standard at that
time and he also resided in the said chawl. On the previous day before
the incident, there was a quarrel between the Waghmare and the
Kharat family. Kharat family had visited the chawl and the room where
they did not stay. The said quarrel had subsided, but on the following
day i.e. the date of the incident on 06.06.2014, the Kharat family
members, some 15-20 persons along with the Complainant revisited
the said chawl premises some time in the afternoon at 2:45 pm. and
since they did not find any person in the Waghmare household, they
barged into their relatives namely Kamble household where the
Applicant and two ladies were present inside. The witness statements
of the neighbours Mr & Mrs. Tambe have been recorded by the
prosecution and are placed on record at page nos. 42 & 43. The
witness statements prima facie state that since the Applicant was
confronted by the mob led by the first informant and in order to ward
them off, he brandished a sword. This is the charge of criminal
intimidation by the weapon levelled against the Applicant and nothing
more. The question therefore before the Court is why was the
Applicant compelled to brandish the sword and where did the sword
come from. The Applicant admittedly is the student of XII standard.
The sword which was brandished by him was an award received by
him and was displayed in his house. However when the incident
occurred in the afternoon and the young offender was confronted with
2 of 6
31apl-1466-26.doc
a mob of 15-20 persons led by the private Complainant - the first
informant, he did so in all probability to ward them off. No intention
can be attributed to the Applicant in such a scenario and situation to
have any intention of harassing. No hurt was either caused. Further,
the precursor incident did not happen because of the Applicant or his
family members (Kamble family). Merely because he was related to the
Waghmare family, the Kharat family members on the following day
came upon Waghmare family but since they were not there they visited
the the Kamble family and found the young offender at his house.
4. I have perused the material which has been placed on record
and prima facie I find that the criminal intimidation charge against the
young offender who is the Applicant before the Court though may, at
first blush, appear to be because of him threatening with the sword in
his hand, but the reason behind the same will have to be looked into
by the Court and is considered herein. The Applicant is now a grown
up man and has received an offer letter from an International Shipping
Company called Elegant Marine Services Private Limited for
undertaking a job.
5. Considering Applicant’s young age, Court is hopeful that
Applicant’s family will undoubtedly do their duty to make every effort
and attempt to reform and aid the Applicant in leading a reformed life.
However on the flip side, if a chance is given to the Applicant because
3 of 6
31apl-1466-26.doc
of his young age, there is a possibility that he will be remorseful and
repent in retrospect about his unwarranted action. This is a chance
required to be taken by the Court because punishment has to be
believed to be inflicted for a reformative result rather than being
punitive in nature. Court feels that reform and rehabilitation of the
such young accused person needs to be considered especially when age
of the accused is young so that the accused gets an opportunity / or is
given an opportunity to reform, rehabilitate and earn his livelihood
honorably from the perspective of social integration. The Court must
consider the young age of accused. The age of the Applicant is very
young. If the Applicant is made to languish in jail or face the trail
further, there is every possibility that he might lose faith in the
institution and society at large and may tread the path of criminality or
would waste his life. Prolonged trial exposes many youth to abuse as is
shown statistically. This is the reason why this Court feels that any /
every semblance of a chance towards a reformative approach should be
adopted, especially in the case of young offenders like the Applicant.
Hence every opportunity or to that extent risk should be constructively
taken by the Court in the case of young offenders and they should be
given an opportunity to become a good citizen in the Society. These
observations are only in the view of the young age of the Applicant
before me and it is only a means to explore an alternative to such trial
so that the Applicant can become a good citizen.
4 of 6
31apl-1466-26.doc
6. In view of the above, this Court or rather the prosecution
cannot come in the way of resurrecting the life of the Applicant who is
admittedly an young offender and had unfortunately found himself in
a situation on the fateful day of the incident. There are no antecedents.
Applicant is an educated person. He has no motive to indulge in any
untoward act. There is no premeditation and planning. Applicant
found himself in a situation where he tried to protect himself. While
considering the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the
Applicant and on perusing the material placed on record, I am of the
clear opinion that present Criminal Application therefore deserves to
be allowed and granted. The Criminal Application is so allowed in
terms of prayer clause (a). All consequential proceedings pursuant to
filing of FIR bearing C.R. No. 56 of 2015 registered with Dadar Police
Station are quashed. Prayer clause (a) reads thus :
“a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside
the F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. 56/2015 registered with Dadar
Police Station and all consequent proceedings in C.C. No.
1204/PW/2016 pending before the Ld. Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Dadar, Mumbai, as against
the Applicant, in the interest of justice;”
7. The Police are directed to act upon a server copy of this
order for the purpose of verification of the Applicant’s case for
employment purpose. If the Applicant applies for police clearance
certificate, I direct the Police to ensure that they shall consider the
server copy of this order downloaded from the High Court website
5 of 6
31apl-1466-26.doc
submitted by the Applicant and grant the Police Clearance Certificate
(PCC Certificate) to the Applicant immediately, if there is no other
offence against him.
8. In view of the act of the Applicant of brandishing the sword,
a message also needs to be given to the youth of this country that they
will not take the law into their hands by brandishing a weapon (in this
case a sword which he had received as an award and was displayed
inside his house on the wall) which is considered to be a dangerous
weapon, lest in a situation that may eventually arise, it may end up
causing physical and bodily harm to somebody. In that view of the
matter, I direct the Applicant to pay costs of Rs.10,000/- which shall be
paid by his father who is present in Court and who agrees to pay the
same to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa Advocate Aid Fund.
The bank details for paying costs are as under:
Account Name Bar Council of Maharashtra and
Goa Advocate Aid Fund
Name of the Bank State Bank of India
Branch Mumbai Main Branch
Account No. 10996711937
IFS Code SBIN 0000300
Type of the Account Saving Account
9. The Criminal Application is allowed and disposed of in the
above terms.
Urmila Ingale [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
AJAY
by AJAY
TRAMBAK
6 of 6
TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE
UGALMUGALE Date:
2026.08.24
21:03:50 +0530
Checking your session…