Bombay High Court
SHYAMRAO KISANRAO SALUNKE AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
- Bench
- S G CHAPALGAONKAR
Holding
The FIR and all consequential proceedings are quashed as the dispute is civil and the parties have settled with the complainant’s consent.
Summary
The applicants, Shyamrao Kisanrao Salunke and another, filed an application to quash FIR No.38 of 2025 registered under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement, with the respondents receiving Rs.7 lakh as full and final settlement, and the second respondent consented to the quashment. The court observed that the dispute was essentially civil in nature and that the settlement removed the basis for criminal prosecution. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466, the court held that the FIR and consequent proceedings could be quashed. Accordingly, the application for quashment was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR filed under Section 420 r/w Section 34 of the IPC can be quashed when the parties have settled the underlying civil dispute.
- Whether the consent of the complainant/second respondent to the settlement bars further criminal proceedings.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 420
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- quashment of FIR
- settlement of civil dispute
- IPC 420
- consent of parties
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:16148
1137-appln-773-2026 (2).odt
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 773 OF 2026
Shyamrao Kisanrao Salunke And Another
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another
...
Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Rupesh Anil Jaiswal
APP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.R. Yadav Lonikar
Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. Waghmare Omprakash V.
...
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
DATED : APRIL 10, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. The applicants seek quashment of FIR No.38 of 2025
registered with Ardhapur Police Station, Nanded for offences
punishable under Section 420 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and
consequential proceedings.
2. Today, learned advocates appearing for applicants and
respondent no.2 made a joint submission that parties have amicably
settled their dispute. Respondent no.2 has no objection as for
quashing of FIR and consequential proceedings.
3. Respondent no.2 has tendered an affidavit stating that
applicants had agreed to pay an amount of Rs.7 lakh towards full and
final settlement of dispute. On 18.02.2026, they have paid amount
through D.D. Nos.500891 and 500890 in the name of Hari Om
Bhojnalaya. The respondent no.2 has, therefore, consented for
quashment of FIR and consequential proceeding.
1137-appln-773-2026 (2).odt
(2)
4. Parties were relegated to Registrar (Judicial) of this
Court, who has forwarded report of verification of parties and
affidavit filed by respondent no.2. It can be observed that allegations
in FIR were regarding transactions between informant and applicants.
Pertinently, dispute between parties is of civil nature. They have
amicably settled the same. Respondent no.2 has received amount
which was due from applicants.
5. In light of aforesaid factual matrix, considering law laid
down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Narinder Singh and
Others Vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466,
case is made out to quash FIR and further proceedings.
6. In result, application is allowed in terms of prayer clause
(A).
(S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.)
Mujaheed//
Checking your session…