Bombay High Court
AKSHAYKUMAR BHARATBHAI LOHAR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The High Court allowed the application and quashed the FIR and the regular criminal case.
Summary
The applicants, a husband, filed a criminal application seeking quash of FIR No. 740 of 2024 and a regular criminal case arising from a matrimonial dispute, alleging offences under Sections 498‑A, 323, 354, 354A, 509, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The wife (respondent No.2) and the State were respondents. The parties later settled the dispute amicably and executed a compromise deed dated 22‑07‑2026, which they voluntarily submitted to the court. The court, noting the settlement and the absence of any coercion, held that the criminal proceedings could be dismissed. Accordingly, the application was allowed and the FIR and the criminal case were quashed. No order as to costs was made.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings arising from a matrimonial dispute can be quashed when the parties have reached an amicable settlement and executed a compromise.
- Whether the FIR and the regular criminal case under the cited IPC sections should stand in view of the compromise.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 323, 34, 354, 354A, 498A, 504, 506, 509
Subjects
- matrimonial dispute
- compromise
- quash of FIR
- Section 498A
- criminal proceedings
- settlement
- High Court of Bombay
Judgment
1 70appln2492.26
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
70 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2492 OF 2026
AKSHAYKUMAR BHARATBHAI LOHAR AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
...
Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Chaudhari Chetan Barku
APP for Respondents/State : Ms. Ashlesha S. Deshmukh
Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. S.A. Mulla h/f Mr. Garje Nisargraj B.
…
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
DATE : 07.09.2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicants, learned APP
for the State and the learned Advocate for respondent No. 2.
2. The learned Advocate for the applicants and the learned
Advocate appearing for respondent No. 2, jointly submit that the parties
have settled their dispute amicably amongst themselves and have also
entered into the compromise terms, which have been placed on record
dated 22.07.2026.
3. The record indicates that the parties have appeared before
the Registrar (Judicial) and the report to that effect is placed on record,
which indicates that applicant No. 1, who is husband and respondent
No. 2 who is wife, have admitted and accepted the contents of the
compromise terms and they voluntarily submit that they have entered
2 70appln2492.26
into the compromise terms and there is no force, which has been applied
to them.
4. Taking into consideration the fact that that the offences
alleged pertains to matrimonial dispute, between the applicant and
respondent No. 2 and now they have settled their dispute amongst
themselves, hence, the present proceeding can be quashed.
5. In the aforesaid circumstances, the Criminal Application No.
2492 of 2026 stands allowed. Hence the following order :
ORDER
(i) The application stands allowed in terms of prayer Clause
(B).
(ii) The First Information Report bearing No. 740 of 2024,
dated 06.12.2024, registered at Nandurbar City Police Station,
District Nandurbar, for the offences punishable under Sections
498-A, 323, 354, 354(A), 509, 504 and 506 r/w 34 of the
Indian Penal Code and also Regular Criminal Case No. 116 of
2025 are stands quashed and set aside, against the present
applicants.
(iii) No order as to the costs.
(HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.)
mahajansb/
Checking your session…