Bombay High Court
SAYYAD AYUB ALLADIN ATAR (REFERRED AS SAYYAD AYYUB SAYYAD ALAUDDIN)versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The Court held that, despite the trial having started, the criminal proceedings may be quashed on account of an inter‑se settlement, subject to payment of costs and an undertaking by the accused.
Summary
The applicants were facing trial for offences under sections 380, 201, 411 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and several sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita arising from two FIRs registered in Aurangabad. The parties reached an inter‑se compromise, executed a compromise deed and filed an affidavit seeking quash of the criminal proceedings. The Court, after noting that the trial had commenced and the complainant had been examined, considered the nature of the allegations and the settlement. It held that the proceedings could be quashed on payment of costs and an undertaking by the applicants. Accordingly, the criminal application was allowed, the FIRs and related regular criminal cases were quashed, and the applicants were directed to pay the stipulated costs and file an undertaking to refrain from future criminal activity.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings that have already commenced can be quashed on the basis of an inter‑se compromise between the accused and the complainant
- Whether payment of costs and an undertaking are sufficient conditions for granting a quash order
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115-2, 127-2, 138, 140-3, 189-2, 190, 303-2, 351-2, 351-3, 352
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 201, 380, 411
Subjects
- inter‑se compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- FIR
- Indian Penal Code
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- cost payment
- criminal procedure
- settlement
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:43666
67appln3113-36
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
67 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3113 OF 2026
Sayyad Ayub Alladin Atar (referred As Sayyad Ayyub Sayyad Alauddin)
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Shinde Tushar Chandrakant, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. A. Gaikwad,APP for Respondent State
Mr. S. A. Gaikwad, Advocate for Respondent No.3
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
Dated : 21st September, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard learned Advocate for the applicants, learned APP for
the State and learned Advocate appearing for the original complainant.
2. The applicants are facing trial in connection with the FIRs
bearing Crime No. 588 of 2023 registered with MIDC, CIDCO Police
Station, Aurangabad for the offence punishable under sections 380,
201, 411 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Crime No. 152 of 2026
registered with Harsul Police Station, District Aurangabad for the
offences punishable under sections 140-3, 127-2, 303-2, 138, 115-2,
352, 351-2, 351-3, 189-2, 190 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. This Court, by an order dated 17.08.2026, had directed the
applicants and respondent no. 3 to appear before the learned Registrar
(Judicial) for verification. Accordingly, the verification is complete and
the learned Registrar (Judicial) has filed a report in this Court stating
1 of 3
67appln3113-36
that applicant Nos. 1 to 11 and respondent No.3 have arrived at mutual
settlement among themselves and have executed compromise deed.
The compromise deed produced on record mentions that the parties
inter se have decided to compromise and get the criminal proceedings
quashed and set aside. In addition to the compromise deed, respondent
no.3 has also filed an affidavit on record mentioning about the inter se
compromise and permitting the proceedings to be quashed.
4. Taking into consideration that the parties have settled the
dispute, I am of the opinion that the impugned proceedings can be
quashed on payment of cost for engaging police machinery and the
Court machinery. The learned Advocate for the applicants submits that
the applicants have brought a Demand Draft of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees
Twenty Five Thousand only) in the name of Registrar by way of cost
and they are also ready to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only)
more in the Registry within a period of two weeks from today.
5. Though the learned APP has rightly pointed out that the trial
in the proceedings is initiated and the complainant has been examined,
wherein the complainant has deposed against the present applicant,
still, taking into consideration the nature of allegations made therein,
the settlement between parties, can be taken into consideration and
the proceedings can be quashed. Hence, the following order:
2 of 3
67appln3113-36
ORDER
(a) Criminal Application is allowed.
(b) First Information Report bearing FIRs bearing Crime No. 588 of
2023 registered with MIDC, CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad
for the offence punishable under sections 380, 201, 411 r/w 34
of the Indian Penal Code and Crime No. 152 of 2026 registered
with Harsul Police Station, District Aurangabad for the offences
punishable under sections 140-3, 127-2, 303-2, 138, 115-2, 352,
351-2, 351-3, 189-2, 190 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
and consequential proceeding bearing Regular Criminal Case No.
173 of 2025 and Regular Criminal Case No. 1997 of 2026
pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class,
Aurangabad are hereby quashed and set aside.
(c) The payment of cost, as aforesaid, be made with the Registry
within a period of two weeks from today.
(f) The applicants shall file an undertaking clearly mentioning that
they will not indulge themselves in any such criminal activities
and maintain peace and harmony in the society.
(HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.)
JPChavan
3 of 3
Checking your session…