Bombay High Court
ASARAM KAMLAJI KALAMKAR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The court quashed the FIR and all consequent criminal proceedings as the parties had settled the dispute and the complainant withdrew the complaint.
Summary
The petitioners, comprising senior members of a family, sought quash of FIR No. 317 of 2026 filed under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS, alleging offences arising from matrimonial disputes. The complainant, the wife, consented to withdraw the complaint after a settlement facilitated by elder family members, and the parties agreed to cohabit. The court examined the investigation records and found the dispute to be a private family matter now resolved. Relying on the settlement and the withdrawal of the complaint, the court held there was no basis to continue the criminal proceedings. Consequently, both criminal applications were allowed and the FIR and any consequent proceedings were quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS can be quashed on the ground of settlement and withdrawal of the complaint.
- Whether a private family settlement extinguishes liability for the alleged offences.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 115(2), 3(5), 351(3), 352, 85
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- settlement
- quash
- FIR
- matrimonial dispute
- BNS
- private family compromise
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:43915
-1-
939-APPLN-3366-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3366 OF 2026
1. Asaram Kamlaji Kalamkar (Father-in-Law)
Age : 69 years, Occu: Agri,
2. Alkabai Asaram Kalamkar (Mother in law)
Age: 60 years Occu: Agri.
Both R/o. Antarawali Khandi.
Tq. Paithan Dist. Ch. Sambhajinagar
3. Chhaya Appasaheb Hande
Age : 41 yrs, Occu : Household
R/o. Devi Krupa Building, Sonarpada,
Tq. Kalyan Dist. Thane
4. Vandana Narayan Agale,
Age : 38 years, Occu : Household,
R/o. Gevral Bk. Tq. Paithan,
Dist. Ch. Sambhajinagar
5. Vijaya Pandurang @ Raju Bodakhe
Age : 35 years, Occu : Household,
R/o. Chinchala Post Viha Mandwa,
Tq. Paithan Dist. Ch. Sambhajinagar
6. Suverna Krushna Kuber
Age : 34 years, Occu : Household,
R/o. Krushna Kuber, Bhalgaon
Tq. & Dist. Chh. Sambhajinagar … Applicants.
(Applicant no.3 to 6
are sisters in law)
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Pachod Police Station, Pachod
Dist. Ch. Sambhajinagar
2. Kajal Baliram Kalamkar
Age : 21 years Occu: Fashion Designer,
R/o. C/o Baliram Babasaheb Langde,
At Present Brahmangaon, Tq.. Paithan
Dist. Ch. Sambhajinagar ...Respondents
-2-
939-APPLN-3366-2026
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3680 OF 2026
Baliram Asaram Kalamkar (Husband)
Age: 30 years Occu: Agri,
R/o. Antarawali Khandi,
Tq. Paithan Dist. Ch. Sambhajinagar … Applicant
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Pachod Police Station, Pachod
Dist. Ch. Sambhajinagar
2. Kajal Baliram Kalamkar
Age : 21 years Occu: Fashion Designer,
R/o. C/o. Baliram Babasaheb Langde
At Present Brahmangaon, Tq. Paithan
Dist. Ch. Sambhajinagar … Respondents
.....
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Syed Azizoddin R.
APP for Respondent - State : Mr. S. D. Ghayal
Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. Rehan Khan
.....
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
DATED : 22nd SEPTEMBER 2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. I
have also perused the report about the compromise submitted by
the learned Registrar (Judicial) of this Court along with the
Consent Terms filed by the parties on record.
2. The Consent Terms categorically record that the
-3-
939-APPLN-3366-2026
differences between the complainant and the present applicants
have been settled due to the intervention of elderly members of the
society and that in the interest of the better future of the minor
child, the parties have now started cohabiting with each other. The
statement also records that respondent No.2-wife agrees to
withdraw her complaint and FIR against the present applicants
and his family members, and therefore, respondent No. 2 jointly
prays that C.R. No. 317 of 2026 registered with Pachod Police
Station, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Chh. Sambhajinagar, for the offences
punishable under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 3(5) of the
BNS and the subsequent proceedings be quashed and set aside.
3. I have perused the investigation papers and also the
material that has been placed on record. The dispute prima facie
seems to have arisen out of the matrimonial relationship and the
differences between the parties. Now that the husband and wife
have willingly decided to cohabit with each other and lead a happy
life, I am of the opinion that there is no substance in keeping the
proceedings pending.
4. Hence, both Criminal Applications stand allowed.
5. The First Information Report bearing Crime No. 0317 of
-4-
939-APPLN-3366-2026
2026, registered with Pachod Police Station, Tq. Paithan, District
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for the offences punishable under
Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3), and 3(5) of the BNS and the
consequential proceedings stand quashed and set aside.
6. Any consequential proceedings, such as filing of a
charge-sheet or any proceedings before the Trial Court also stand
quashed in view of the settlement between the parties.
(HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR)
JUDGE
Tandale
Checking your session…