BHAGWAT DNYANOBA MULGIRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

                                 1                  979criappln474.26



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

             979 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 474 OF 2026
                               WITH
              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2461 OF 2026

                    BHAGWAT DNYANOBA MULGIR
                               VERSUS
           THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
                                   ...
          Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Salunke Sudarshan J.
             APP for Respondents/State : Mr. S.V. Hange
         Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Wakure Sanjay A.
                                   ...


                         CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
                         DATE : 01.09.2026
PER COURT :


1.          Both these applications are seeking quashment of the First

Information Report (for short “FIR”) bearing No. 304 of 2025 dated

15.11.2025 registered with Kranti Chowk Police Station, District

Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for the offences punishable under Sections

69, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5), 89 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for

short “BNS”) and Section 3(1)(s) and 3(1)(w)(ii) of the Scheduled Castes

and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The Applicant

also seeks quashment of the FIR, Charge-sheet and consequential

Special Case No. 16 of 2026 pending on the file of the learned Additional

Sessions Judge, Aurangabad.



2.          The main ground on which the applicant is seeking

quashment of the proceedings is the amicable settlement between the
                                  2                     979criappln474.26



applicant and respondent No. 2. The applicant Bhagwat Dnyanoba

Mulgir and respondent No. 2 have appeared before the Registrar,

(Judicial) of this Court and have got their credentials and identifications

verified alongwith the terms of the compromise.         The application was

filed alongwith annexures and terms of compromise in which it is

categorically stated that the applicant and respondent No. 2 have

amicably settled the matter, as both of them want to lead a peaceful life.

It is mentioned that respondent No. 2 does not want to continue with the

criminal prosecution initiated at her instance. The settlement and

compromise have been arrived at amicably and voluntarily. Taking into

consideration the character and growth of both applicant as well as

respondent No. 2 and the allegations have buried from differences with

understanding to lead their individual peaceful life. Both of them have

in fact stated in the compromise deed that the applicant and the

informant i.e. respondent No. 2 have decided to marry each other and to

lead a happily matrimonial life. The settlement terms have also

categorically mentiond that respondent No. 2 has no objection to quash

the criminal proceeding against the applicant. Similarly, as far as the

applicant by name Nita Manoj Korde @ Dnyanoba Dattarao Mulgir, who

happens to be the sister of applicant Bhagwat and father of the applicant

Bhagwat    respectively.   Respondent   No.   2   has     entered    into   the

compromise deed when they themselves executed it before the Section

Officer of this Court.     The learned Advocate for the applicant thus,

submits that taking into consideration the compromise deed, the
                                  3                   979criappln474.26



application may be allowed and the proceedings may be quashed.



3.          The learned Advocate appearing for respondent No. 2

reiterated and confirms the compromise and amicable settlement has

taken place between the parties and respondent No. 2, who is presently

in Delhi pursuing her Union Public Service Commission’s (for short

“UPSC”) studies, as she aspires to appear UPSC examination does not

wish to go ahead with the prosecution against the applicant.



4.          The learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State opposes

the application on the ground that respondent No. 2’s name has been

forwarded for grant of compensation under the Victim’s Compensation

Scheme and also for compensation under the Schedule Castes and

Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short “Atrocities

Act”). However, he does not have clear instructions as to whether the

amount has already been disbursed or not.



5.          The learned Advocate appearing for respondent No. 2 also

has no instructions as to whether the amount has been received by

respondent No. 2 or not.



6.          Taking into consideration that the prosecution essentially

arose out of the relationship between the applicant Bhagwat and

respondent No. 2. The allegations in the FIR includes the allegations of
                                4                   979criappln474.26



sexual intercourse on the basis of promise to marry by deceitful means

and consequently the offence under Section 69 of the BNS has been

invoked. There is also an allegation concerning administration of tablets

resulting in termination of pregnancy and on the basis of which Section

89 of the BNS has been applied. The certain other offences under the

BNS are also under the provisions of Atrocities Act have been invoked.



7.          The investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has also

been filed. During the pendency of the proceedings, however, the parties

have resolved their dispute. The settlement is not merely asserted across

the bar, but respondent No. 2 has appeared stating that the settlement

has been voluntarily done between the parties and the same has been

verified before the learned Registrar, (Judicial) of this Court. She has

expressed that she does not desire to prosecute the applicant any

further.



8.          The Courts in such matters are conscious that some of the

offences are invoked and the present case is of non compoundable and

that the allegation including under Section 69 of the BNS is also        an

offence relating to miscarriage of pregnancy. The power to quash the

prosecution of settlement cannot be exercised mechanically merely

because the informant no longer desires to prosecute.      The nature of

accusations, it’s social impact and the circumstances in which the

alleged offence occurred and as to whether the continuation of the
                                  5                   979criappln474.26



prosecution would advance administration of the criminal justice are the

factors which are required to be taken into consideration.



9.          On examination of the allegations in the entirety, however,

the genesis of the present prosecution is the personal relationship

between the applicant Bhagwat and respondent No. 2 and the dispute

subsequently arose between them. Section 69 of the BNS creates distinct

offence relating to sexual intercourse by deceitful means upon promise to

marry made without intention to fulfill the same. The allegations in the

present case have therefore, to be appreciated in the factum of frame -

work of the relationship between the parties and cannot be merely a

reason of the offence invoked to be equated for the present purpose that

every prosecution invoking forcible sexual offence.



10.         In the present case the allegations of sexual intercourse

prima facie indicates that it was consensual relationship, though the

consent was alleged to have been obtained by using deceitful means by

false promise of marry. The apprehension of respondent No. 2 that the

applicant Bhagwat will not perform marriage on account that she

belonging to the scheduled caste categorically is the matter which

requires trial. Likewise, in so far as the allegations pertaining to section

89 of the BNS is concerning essential allegations and the material

collected during the investigation concerning the absence of consent of

respondent No. 2 also assumes significance. The applicability and
                                  6                   979criappln474.26



strength of these accusations must therefore, from actual prosecution

material and not merely from the Sections mentioned in the charge-

sheet.


11.         I am equally conscious of invoking the provisions of

Atrocities Act.   Mere existence of offence under the Special enactment

does not create absolute embargo upon the exercise of inherent

jurisdiction of this Court, wherein, the dispute is essentially provided

any character of alleged act is not shown to have committed on account

of the caste of the victim and the Court is satisfied that the settlement is

voluntarily made. The inherent jurisdiction can in an appropriate case

without undermining the object of the provisions of the special

enactment. The allegations in the present case are therefore required to

be examined from such prospect. Respondent No. 2 who would

necessarily constitute the material witness in the prosecution as

consciously resolving the dispute and does not desire into continuation

of the proceedings. The settlement has been independently verified by

the Officer of this Court.   There is nothing presently brought to the

notice of this Court suggesting that the settlement is resolved on threats

and coercion or undue influence. On the contrary the learned Advocate

appearing for respondent No. 2 reaffirms before this Court that

respondent No. 2 has amicably settled the dispute with the applicant.

He also submits that on the contrary, the applicant Bhagwat has

assured and undertaken to perform marriage and live happily hereinafter

with respondent No. 2.
                                7                   979criappln474.26




12.         In these peculiar circumstances, the possibility of the

prosecution culminating into conviction has been substantially removed.

The continuation of the proceedings, would therefore, prolonging dispute

in which the persons directly involved has voluntarily brought to an end.

There is however, one conditional circumstance pertaining to the

sanction of compensation amount by the State Agency to respondent No.

2.



13.         The factum whether the amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- by way of

compensation is actually been paid or not is alleged unverified. In any

case these factors can be taken into consideration and can be addressed

appropriately by directing respondent No. 2 to re-deposit the entire

amount which she has received by way of compensation in any scheme

whether it is victim compensation scheme or under the Atrocities Act as

the victim of this present offence. The said amount will be deposited in

the registry of this Court within a period of 4 weeks from today and upon

receiving the said amount, the Registrar, (Judicial) of this Court shall

ensure that the amount is send back to the Department from which it

was paid to respondent No. 2.



14.         Having regard to the peculiar facts and the case, the nature

of genesis of the relationship between the parties, the settlement

voluntarily arrived at and duly verified, the stand of respondent No. 2
                                  8                   979criappln474.26



consequently removes possibility of the prosecution reaching to its

intended result, I am satisfied that the continuation of criminal

proceeding would not advance the cause of justice.          Subject to the

aforesaid safeguard regarding the amount received by respondent No. 2,

this is an appropriate case for exercising jurisdiction of this Court. The

applications are accordingly, allowed. Hence the following order :



                                  ORDER


       (i)     The applications are allowed.


       (ii)    The impugned FIR bearing No. 304 of 2025 dated
       15.11.2025 registered with Kranti Chowk Police Station, District
       Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for the offences punishable under
       Sections 69, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5), 89 of the Bhartiya Nyaya
       Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) and Section 3(1)(s) and 3(1)(w)(ii)
       of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
       Atrocities) Act, 1989, and the Charge-sheet and consequential
       Special Case No. 16 of 2026 pending on the file of the learned
       Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad are stands quashed and
       set aside.


       (iii)   The amount of compensation if any received by respondent
       No. 2 be deposited in the registry of this Court within a period of
       4 weeks from today.


       (iv)    Upon deposit of said amount in the registry of this Court,
       the Registrar, (Judicial) of this Court is directed to re-deposit the
       said amount with the Department from which the compensation
       was paid to respondent No. 2.
                                  9                  979criappln474.26




        (v)     As and by way the costs, the applicant Bhagwat and
        respondent No. 2 shall play the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs.
        One Lakhs Only) each be deposited in the registry of this Court
        within a period of 3 weeks from today.


        (vi)    Upon said amount is deposited, the registry of this Court
        will forward the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakhs Only)
        to the account of the Centrally Sponsored Scheme – 9488 –
        Strengthening Machinery for Inferment of Protection of Civil
        Rights Act, 1955 and The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
        Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and an amount of Rs.
        1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakhs Only) to the State Linked Scheme,
        MH-221 – MH – Machinery and Civil Rights (22250172).


        (vii)   The applicant Neeta Korde and Dnyanoba Mulgikar shall
        deposit the cost of Rs. 50,000/- each to the District Government
        Cancer Hospital, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.


        (viii) The costs to be deposited within a period of 3 weeks from
        today in the registry of this Court. Upon the costs being
        deposited the Registrar, (Judicial) of this court shall forward the
        same to the District Government Cancer Hospital, Chhatrapati
        Sambhajinagar.



                                      (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.)




mahajansb/