Bombay High Court
PIYUSH JASWANTRAI MEHTA AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
When a dispute is amicably settled and no public policy issue is involved, the criminal proceedings must be quashed.
Summary
The applicants filed a criminal application seeking quash of C.C. No.185/PW of 2022, which arose from FIR No.53 of 2021 alleging offences under Sections 420, 408, 467, 468, 34 of the IPC and Sections 43, 66, 72 of the IT Act. The parties later entered into a consent settlement recorded in a civil suit, and Respondent No.2 withdrew all allegations and filed a consent affidavit indicating no objection to the quash. Relying on Supreme Court precedent that amicable settlements without public policy concerns merit dismissal of pending criminal proceedings, the court allowed the application. Consequently, the criminal case, the charge‑sheet, and all related proceedings were quashed and set aside.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings may be continued when the parties have amicably settled the dispute and the respondent has withdrawn allegations.
- Whether the court can quash pending criminal proceedings on the basis of a consent settlement absent any public policy considerations.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 408, 420, 467, 468
- Information Technology Act — s. 43, 66, 72
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- quash of criminal proceedings
- amicable settlement
- consent decree
- IPC
- IT Act
- public policy
Judgment
bdp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BHARAT
DASHARATH
PANDIT CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1539 OF 2026
Digitally signed
by BHARAT
DASHARATH
PANDIT
Date: 2026.09.02
18:58:26 +0530
Piyush Jaswantrai Mehta & Anr. ...Applicants.
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
Mr. Jehangir Khajotia a/w Mr. Prashant Kale, Mr. Bhushan Gawale,
Advocates for the Applicants.
Mr. Dev Mistry i/b YNA Legal LLP, Advocates for Respondent
No.2.
Mr. Rajesh Gangumal Satargani, Respondent No.2, present.
The learned APP for Respondent No.1-State is absent.
Mr. Prashant Patil, PI (Crime), Mr. Deepak Hol, Pairavi Officer, Dr.
D.B. Marg Police Station, present.
CORAM : GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
DATE : 2ND SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C. :
1. The present Application impugns C.C. No.185/PW of 2022
arising out of FIR No.53 of 2021 dated 31 st March, 2021 registered
with Dr. D.B. Marg Police Station, Mumbai under Sections 420, 408,
467, 468, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 43, 66 and
72 of the Information and Technology Act.
1/3
3 APL-1539-2026.doc
2. The learned counsel for the Applicants and Respondent No.2
jointly submit that all disputes and differences between the parties
have been amicably settled. They jointly rely upon the Consent Terms
dated 16th May, 2026 filed by the parties before the City Civil Court at
Bombay in Short Cause Civil Suit No.5989 of 2024. In view of these
Consent Terms, Respondent No.2 has withdrawn all allegations made
against the Petitioners.
3. Mr. Mistry, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 tenders
consent affidavit dated 2nd September, 2026, recording no objection of
Respondent No.2 if the prayers in the Application are allowed. The
said consent affidavit is taken on record and marked ‘X’ for the
purpose of identification.
4. It is well settled law as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Ors. (2014) 6 SCC 466
that when dispute is amicably settled and no element of public policy
is involved, no purpose will be served in keeping the proceedings
pending.
2/3
3 APL-1539-2026.doc
5. In view of the above, Application is allowed and C.C.
No.185/PW of 2022 arising out of FIR No.53 of 2021 registered with
Dr. D.B. Marg Police, Station, Mumbai along with charge-sheet filed
before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 18th Court, Girgaon,
Mumbai and all consequential proceedings are quashed and set aside.
[ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ]
3/3
3 APL-1539-2026.doc
Checking your session…