Bombay High Court
SONU ALIAS YASH SANJAY JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The High Court held that the FIR under Section 109 may be quashed when the parties have amicably settled the private dispute, notwithstanding the seriousness of the injuries.
Summary
The applicant, Sonu Alias Yash Sanjay Jadhav, was charged under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for causing three grievous injuries to the complainant during a dispute over the use of a boring water. Both parties later filed affidavits stating that the misunderstanding had been resolved and they wished to maintain peace in their society. The State argued that the seriousness of the injuries warranted continuation of the criminal proceedings and noted that the applicant's anticipatory bail had been rejected by the Sessions Court. The High Court examined the FIR, medical certificate, and statements, noting that the dispute was essentially a private civil matter now settled by the parties. Relying on its inherent powers, the Court quashed the FIR on the basis of the settlement, subject to the applicant paying costs of Rs. 50,000 within three weeks. The order stipulated that the quashment would become effective upon payment and verification of the costs.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita can be quashed on the ground of settlement between the parties.
- Whether the seriousness of the injuries and the pending anticipatory bail application affect the Court's power to quash the FIR.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109
Subjects
- settlement
- quash of FIR
- Section 109
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- inherent powers of court
- grievous hurt
- anticipatory bail
Judgment
1 937APPLN2928.2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
937 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2928 OF 2026
Sonu Alias Yash Sanjay Jadhav
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another
...
Adv. Yogesh Arun Jadhav for Applicant
Mr. S. V. Hange - APP for the State
Adv. Pritam P. Jadhav for Respondent No. 2
...
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
DATED : 01ST OCTOBER, 2026
ORAL ORDER :
1. Heard the learned Advocate for the Applicant, the learned
APP appearing for the State and the learned Advocate for Respondent
No. 2.
2. The learned Advocate appearing for the
Complainant/Respondent No. 2 and the learned Advocate for the
Applicant jointly submit that the parties have amicably settled the
dispute amongst themselves. They have decided to resolve the issue and
live happily in the Society.
3. The affidavit-in-reply filed by the Complainant/Respondent
No. 2 states, in paragraph No. 6, that the incident took place due to a
misunderstanding between the parties and that, now the
misunderstanding and issues have been clarified, they do not wish to
2 937APPLN2928.2026.odt
continue with any kind of disharmony amongst themselves. They are
known to each other, had good relations, and would like to continue the
same.
4. The learned APP appearing for the State submits that the
offence is under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and that
the injuries caused were to the head of the Complainant. There are three
grievous injuries caused. He states that, in such a scenario, the
statement of the Complainant should not be accepted, as the
investigation is in progress and the anticipatory bail application of the
Applicant is also pending before this Court. He submits that the Sessions
Court has rejected the Applicant's application for anticipatory bail.
5. I have perused the copy of the F.I.R. and the medical
certificate produced by the learned APP, which clearly suggest that the
assault was on the head of the Complainant and that three grievous
injuries were caused due to the said assault. The statements of the
injured Complainant recorded by the Investigating Officer on
18.05.2026 and 20.05.2026 are taken into consideration. It appears that
the dispute between the parties is on account of the use of the boring
water. In the supplementary statement dated 20.05.2026, the
Complainant has clearly stated that, when an attempt was made by the
present Applicant on 14.05.2026 to use the boring water, he could not
start the said boring and misunderstood that the Complainant had
3 937APPLN2928.2026.odt
manipulated the said boring so that the Applicant could not use it and
that only the Complainant could use it for his construction purpose.
6. The affidavit-in-reply filed by Respondent
No.2/Complainant states that this misunderstanding between the parties
has now been clarified and settled. They have decided to reside in the
Society by maintaining peace and harmony. They previously had good
relations with each other and intend to continue the same in the future.
7. Though the offence registered is under Section 109 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the injuries caused to the
Complainant are grievous in nature, the inter se dispute between the
parties is private in nature. The Complainant himself has expressed his
desire to settle the dispute on the ground that the issue has been settled
and, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by compelling the
parties to face the trial before the Trial Court. Therefore, I am inclined to
exercise my inherent powers to quash the proceedings on the ground of
settlement and the assurance given by the parties to maintain peace and
harmony. Hence, the Application is allowed on the condition that the
Applicant shall pay costs of Rs. 50,000/- [Rupees Fifty Thousand] with
the High Court Dispensary, Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. Hence, I pass the following order:-
ORDER
[i] The Application is allowed.
4 937APPLN2928.2026.odt
[ii] The FIR bearing Crime No. 0246 of 2026 registered with
Pachora Police Station, District Jalgaon, for offence
punishable under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023, against the Applicant stands quashed and set
aside.
[iii] The Applicant shall personally deposit an amount of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with the High
Court Dispensary, Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, towards costs, within a period
of three (3) weeks from today, failing which the
investigation and proceedings shall continue.
[iv] Upon deposit of the amount as directed above and
verification of the receipt thereof by the learned APP,
Mr. D. J. Patil, the order will come into effect.
[ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ]
JUDGE
SG Punde
Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 01/10/2026 20:47:10
Checking your session…