Bombay High Court

ASHOK FAKIRRAO BAN AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED
Bench: S G CHAPALGAONKAR

Holding

The Court held that even non‑compoundable offences may be quashed where the parties have amicably settled the dispute, in accordance with Supreme Court guidelines on the exercise of inherent powers.

Summary

The applicants filed a criminal application seeking quashment of FIR No.580/2018, which alleged offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC, and a related regular criminal case. The parties later reached an amicable settlement, executed a joint affidavit of compromise, and the respondent No.2 expressed no objection to the quashment. The Court examined the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab for exercising inherent powers to dismiss non‑compoundable offences when the dispute is settled. Relying on those guidelines and noting the matrimonial and personal nature of the dispute, the Court held that there was no justification to continue criminal proceedings. Consequently, the application for quashment of the FIR was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether an FIR involving non‑compoundable offences such as Section 498‑A IPC can be quashed on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties.
Whether the Court can exercise its inherent powers under the CrPC to dismiss criminal proceedings in a matrimonial dispute despite the offences being non‑compoundable.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 320, 482
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 323, 34, 498-A, 504, 506

Subjects

quashment
FIR
non-compoundable offence
Section 498-A
matrimonial dispute
settlement
inherent powers
CrPC Section 482
Supreme Court guidelines

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:9096-DB
                                          (1)                     956-appln-699-2025.odt



                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.699 OF 2025

                            ASHOK FAKIRRAO BAN AND OTHERS
                                             VERSUS
                       THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
                                                 …
               Mr. Hemand U. Dhage, Advocate for the Applicants.
               Mrs. A. S. Mantri, AGP for Respondent-State.
               Mr. S. A. Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
                                                …
                                         CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
                                         DATED : 27th FEBRUARY, 2026.
               P.C.:-

               1.      The present application is filed for quashment of FIR

               No.580/2018 registered with Rahuri Police Station, Ahmednagar

               for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of

               Indian Penal Code and consequential proceeding in Regular

               Criminal Case No.16/2019 pending before Judicial Magistrate First

               Class at Rahuri.


               2.      On 27.02.2026 learned Advocate appearing for applicants and

               respondent no.2 submitted before this Court that parties have

               arrived at amicable settlement and tendered joint affidavit of such

               terms of compromise.       Accordingly, parties were relegated to

               Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. The applicants and respondent

               no.2 presented themselves before Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.

               The respondent no.2 accepted contents of joint affidavit and

               submitted that she has no objection to allow application, as dispute
                             (2)                       956-appln-699-2025.odt



has been amicably settled. The terms of settlement is taken on

record and marked as Exhibit ‘X’ for identification.


3.       Considering nature of dispute, if parties have amicably

settled the same on intervention of relatives, there is no reason to

direct them with criminal proceeding. In case of Narinder Singh

Vs. State of Punjab and Ors.1, Supreme Court has laid down

guidelines for exercising inherent powers in cases where offence is

not compoundable under Section 320 of Criminal Procedure Code.

The present case fairly fit within guidelines laid down by Supreme

Court, as dispute is matrimonial and personal in nature.


4.       In result, Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer

Clause (B).



                                       (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)
                                                JUDGE
Devendra/February-2026




1    (2014) 6 SCC 466.

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…