Bombay High Court

SYED RIZWANUDDIN SYED NASEERUDDIN AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED
Bench: S G CHAPALGAONKAR

Holding

The Court quashed the FIR and the pending criminal proceeding, holding that the settlement between the parties precludes continuation of the criminal case.

Summary

The husband and his father-in-law applied to quash an FIR (Crime No.355 of 2024) and a pending criminal proceeding (RCC No.228 of 2025) that alleged offences under sections 498‑A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Both parties submitted that the matrimonial dispute between the husband and the wife had been amicably settled, and the wife filed a consent affidavit confirming they were living together happily. The Court observed that the case involved a civil‑family dispute and, relying on the Supreme Court’s observation in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) SCC 466, held that such cases should be quashed when the parties have resolved their issues. Consequently, the application for quashment was allowed and the criminal proceedings were disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings should be quashed on the ground of an amicable settlement between the parties
Whether the offences alleged are of a civil/family nature warranting quashment
Applicability of the Supreme Court precedent in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab to the present matrimonial dispute

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 323, 34, 498-A, 504, 506

Subjects

quashment
FIR
matrimonial dispute
settlement
civil nature of criminal case
Indian Penal Code
Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:23328

1 cran 538.2026.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

1050 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 538 OF 2026

1. Syed Rizwanuddin Syed Naseeruddin, (husband)
age 39 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o Mahaveer Nagar,
Asif Nagar, Hyderabad, TS.

2. Syed Naseeruddin Sharfuddin (father in law),
age 65 yrs, Occ. Nil,
R/o Taj Nagar, Asif Nagar,
Hyderabad TS. Applicants.

VERSUS

1. The State Of Maharashtra,
through its Nava Mondha Police Station,
Parbhani.

2. Arshiya w/o Sayyed Rizwanuddin,
age 35 years, Occ Housewife,
R/o House No.12-2-389,
Mahavir Nagar, Gudi Malkapur,
Hyderabad, TS. Respondents.
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Shaikh Md Aamir Abdul Qadir
APP for Respondents: Mrs. P.V. Diggikar
Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. Azhar Baig
...

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
Dated : June 12, 2026

FINAL ORDER :-

1. Applicants seeks quashment of the FIR in crime No.355

of 2024 dated 23.7.2024 registered with Nava Mondha police

station, Parbhani for the offences punishable under sections

498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The
2 cran 538.2026.odt

applicants further seek quashment of consequential charge-

sheet and criminal proceeding in RCC No.228 of 2025 pending

before the J.M.F.C. Parbhani.

2. On 12.6.2026 learned advocates appearing for respective

parties had jointly submitted that parties have amicably settled

the dispute and they wants to file on record terms of the

compromise consent affidavit. Eventually, respondent no.2,

filed consent affidavit before this Court, wherein she states that

she has settled her matrimonial disputes with the applicant

husband and happily residing with him at Hyderabad.

Respondent no.2 is personally present before Court and

reiterated contents of affidavit.

3. It can be observed that applicant no.1 and respondent

no.2 have genuinely settled their matrimonial dispute and

respondent no.2 has resumed company of applicant no.1 and

they are leading happy married life.

4. In light of aforesaid factual backdrop and looking to

nature of allegations in the FIR, this Court finds that

observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case of

Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another

reported in (2014) SCC 466 squarely applies to the facts of the
3 cran 538.2026.odt

present. Reference can be given to paragraph no.31, wherein

it is observed as under :-

“31.Where criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-
dominantly civil character, particularly those arising out
of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial
relationships or family disputes should be quashed when
the parties have resolved their entire disputes among
themselves. The possibility of conviction is remote and
bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the
accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme
injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the
criminal cases.”

5. In light of aforesaid exposition of law and settlement

arrived at between the parties as discernible from consent

affidavit filed by respondent no.2, application deserves to be

allowed and the same is allowed in terms of prayer clause “B’.

Criminal application stands disposed of.

( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. )
...

aaa/-f

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…