Bombay High Court
KAMLOG KALASING KROversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
- Bench
- ASHWIN D BHOBE
Holding
The application under Section 528 BSN 2023 is allowed; the FIR and charge‑sheet are quashed subject to payment of Rs 1,00,000 costs.
Summary
The applicant, Kamlog Kalasing Kro, filed an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quash of FIR No. 355 of 2024 and charge‑sheet No. 198 of 2024 relating to offences under Sections 64(1), 64(2)(m), 69, 74, 89, 115(2) and 351(2) of the BSN. The complainant (Respondent No.2) executed an affidavit on 5 February 2026 stating that the dispute with the applicant had been amicably settled, she had no objection to the quash, and she was moving to Meghalaya for further studies. The State of Maharashtra did not oppose the quash but demanded that the applicant pay costs of Rs 1,00,000. The Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents that quashing on the basis of settlement is permissible where justice so requires, held that the FIR and charge‑sheet should be quashed, subject to the condition precedent of cost payment. The applicant was directed to deposit the costs within two weeks and file a compliance affidavit.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR can be quashed under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on the ground of an amicable settlement and the complainant's no‑objection affidavit.
- Whether the seriousness of the offences alleged under the BSN precludes the exercise of the court's inherent power to quash proceedings.
- Whether the court may impose costs on the applicant as a condition precedent to the quash order.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- quash of FIR
- settlement between parties
- Section 528 BSN
- inherent jurisdiction
- costs order
- amicable resolution
- victim's consent
Judgment
85-APL-305-2026.doc
Digitally signed
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
GAYATRI by GAYATRI
RAJENDRA
RAJENDRA SHIMPI
SHIMPI Date: 2026.03.16
20:10:54 +0530 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 305 OF 2026
Kamlog Kalasing Kro … Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents
---
Mr. Ganesh Gupta a/w Mr. Deepak Gupta, Mr. Madan Khansole,
Mr. Sahil Ghorpade, Mr. Surya Gupta, Ms. Priyanka Rathod, Mr.
Tushar Gaikwad, Mr. J. Patil & GG Legal Associates, for Applicant.
Mr. Harshad Dengale, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
Mr. Tanveer Khan, APP for Respondent - State.
-------
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 9th MARCH, 2026
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr. Ganesh Gupta, learned Advocate for the
Applicant, Mr. Tanveer Khan, learned APP for Respondent No. 1 –
State, and Mr. Harshad Dengale, learned Advocate for Respondent
No. 2.
2. This application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is filed by the Applicant for
Gayatri shimpi 1
85-APL-305-2026.doc
quashing the FIR bearing CR No. 355 of 2024, dated 31 st August
2024 (impugned FIR), registered with Sangvi Police Station for
offences punishable under Sections 64(1), 64(2)(m), 69, 74, 89,
115(2), 351(2) of the BSN, 2025, and charge-sheet No. 198 of
2024, arising out of the impugned FIR.
3. Mr. Ganesh Gupta and Mr. Harshad Dengale state that
the Applicant and Respondent No. 2 were friends involved in a
love affair and lived together for a considerable period. They assert
that misunderstandings between the Applicant and Respondent
No. 2 led Respondent No. 2 to file a criminal complaint. They
mention that Respondent No. 2 now wishes to move forward in life
and aims to pursue her career. They clarify that, for this purpose,
she plans to leave the State of Maharashtra and return to her
native State, Meghalaya, to continue her studies. They state that
both Respondent No. 2 and the Applicant have experienced stress
and suffering. They state that the Applicant and Respondent No. 2
have amicably resolved the matter, and that Respondent No. 2 has
filed an affidavit dated 5th February 2026, affirmed before the
Notary Anii Navnathrao Bhosale, giving no objection to the
Gayatri shimpi 2
85-APL-305-2026.doc
quashing of the criminal proceedings. They therefore request
acceptance of Respondent No. 2’s no objection and the quashing of
the impugned FIR and the charge sheet related to it. They rely on
paragraphs Nos. 4 to 8 of the said affidavit dated 5 th February
2026, which are transcribed herein below verbatim.
“4. I say that I am aware that the present
Applicant/Original Accused is preferring present Criminal
Application before this Hon'ble Court thereby seeking
quashing of the F.I.R. bearing its C.R. No. 355 of 2024 duly
registered with Sangvi Police Station lodged by me, we
have amicably settled the dispute and differences that
arose between me and the accused and I do not wish that
the criminal investigation/prosecution proceeds any
further. I do not wish to strain the cordial relationship that
exists between us and our families as I want to move
forward in life without any stain of past and doesn't wish
to proceed any further with the Impugned FIR.
5. I say that I have settled my case amicably with the
Applicant in view of resolving the conflict going, therefore
now I am willing to settle all my complaints with the
Applicant, Henceforth I provide my consent & will, to
withdraw my criminal complaint which is pending in
terms of criminal F.I.R. bearing its C.R No. 355 of 2024
registered by Sangvi Police Station at the instance of
Respondent No. 2 u/s 61(1), 64(2)(m), 69, 74, 89,
115(2), 351(2) of BNS on 31.08.2024 against the
Applicant.
6. I say that I am not willing to lead any evidence
whether oral or documentary either before Police
Machinery or before appropriate Court of Law in the
present subject crime against the present Applicant in C.R.
No. 355 of 2024 bearing sessions case no. 1024 of 2024 in
view of amicable settlement and thereby consenting to
allow the prayer made in the quashing Application.
Gayatri shimpi 3
85-APL-305-2026.doc
7. I do hereby record my No-Objection for allowing the
application preferred by the above-named Applicant
thereby quashing of criminal F.I.R. bearing its C.R No. 355
of 2024 registered by Sangvi Police Station at the instance
of Respondent No. 2 u/s 64(1), 64(2)(m), 69, 74, 89,
115(2), 351(2) of BNS on 31.08.2024against the
Applicant.
8. I say that I am giving my free consent for quashing of
above referred criminal F.I.R. with my conscious mind, free
will and without any sort of pressure, coercion, fraud
applied on me by any person(s). Further I am also aware
about the effect the present affidavit-cum-declaration
more specifically the criminal F.I.R. bearing its C.R. No.
355 of 2024 and sessions case no. 1024/2024 pending on
the file of Sangvi Police Station may get quashed and the
above-named Applicant may get discharged from the
criminal F.I.R. filed by me for which I am recording my
free consent.”
4. Mr. Tanveer Khan, the learned APP for the State,
submits that as the Respondent No. 2 and the Applicant have
settled the matter, and Respondent No. 2 has expressed her
intention to move on in life, as stated in her Affidavit dated 5 th
February, 2026. He has no objection to the quashing of the
criminal proceedings. However, he insists on imposing costs on the
Applicant.
5. Applicant is present in Court and is identified by his
Advocate Mr. Ganesh Gupta. He tenders the Photostat copy of the
Gayatri shimpi 4
85-APL-305-2026.doc
Identity Card of the Applicant, which is taken on record and
marked as ‘X’ for identification.
6. Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and is identified
by her Advocate Mr. Harshad Dengale. He tenders the Photostat
copy of the Identity Card of Respondent No. 2, which is taken on
record and marked as ‘X-1’ for identification. Respondent No. 2
states that the said Affidavit dated 5 th February, 2026 is filed out of
her own free will and without any pressure or coercion from any
person. She states that the contents of the Affidavit dated 5 th
February, 2026 are as per her say. She reiterates her no objection to
the quashing of the criminal proceedings. Affidavit dated 5 th
February, 2026, filed by the Respondent no. 2 is marked as ‘X-2’ for
identification.
7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madhukar
and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr1 in paragraph Nos. 6
has observed as follows :-
“6. At the outset, we recognise that the offence under
Section 376 IPC is undoubtedly of a grave and heinous
nature. Ordinarily, quashing of proceedings involving such
1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1415
Gayatri shimpi 5
85-APL-305-2026.doc
offences on the ground of settlement between the parties
is discouraged and should not be permitted lightly.
However, the power of the Court under Section 482 CrPC
to secure the ends of justice is not constrained by a rigid
formula and must be exercised with reference to the facts
of each case.”
8. This Court in the case of Dilip Indermal Kothari v/s.
The State of Maharashtra and Another2 in paragraph no. 4 has
observed as follows:-
“4. It is true that offence under Section 376 is serious.
However, considering the age of the prosecutrix and
considering the financial dealing in between them, this
Court feels that the case needs to be quashed. It will take a
long time for final disposal of the case. The Applicant is
required to attend the Court. Respondent No.2 will be
required to attend the Court when case will come up for
recording of her evidence. Already both parties have
suffered lot of pain. So it will be in the interest of both the
parties to quash the proceedings, so that both parties will
be relieved from further mental stress. Hence, Order.
9. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, the
submissions made by the learned Advocate for the parties and the
statement by Respondent No. 2, who is present in Court and has
stated that she intends to leave her past behind to lead a peaceful
life, pursue her further studies (i.e., a Master in Political Science)
in her native State Meghalaya, and does not wish to continue the
criminal proceedings, as also her no objection in the affidavit ‘X-2’,
2. Criminal Application No. 211 of 2022 decided on 10.03.2022.
Gayatri shimpi 6
85-APL-305-2026.doc
no purpose would be served by continuing the criminal
proceedings. It would only cause prolonged distress for all
concerned, especially Respondent No. 2. Therefore, in the peculiar
facts and circumstances of this case, to secure ends of justice, this
Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b), subject to the
condition that the payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- as costs is a condition
precedent. Consequently, th impugned FIR and charge-sheet No.
198 of 2024, arising out of the impugned FIR are quashed.
10. Mr. Ganesh Gupta, Advocate for the Applicant on
instructions from the Applicant, present in court, states that costs
shall be deposited within two weeks.
11. The costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- shall be deposited by the
Applicant in the account mentioned below within two weeks from
today, and a compliance affidavit, along with proof of deposit,
shall be filed in the Registry of this Court on or before 30 th March,
2026.
Deepstambh Foundation, Delhi
Bank Name : ICICI Bank
Account Name : Deepstambh Foundation Delhi
Account Number : 697401700986
Gayatri shimpi 7
85-APL-305-2026.doc
Account Type : Savings
IFSC Code : ICIC0006974
MICR Code : 425229003
12. Criminal Application No. 305 of 2026 is allowed.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Gayatri shimpi 8
Checking your session…