Bombay High Court

SUDAM S/ SHIVRAJ DUDHBHATE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The court held that, given the personal nature of the offence and the informant’s lack of objection, the petition could be allowed.

Summary

The petitioners, Sudam and others, filed a criminal writ petition against the State of Maharashtra. The parties reported that they had settled the dispute and a decree of divorce had been passed, and the informant expressed no objection to granting the petition. The Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the petition, citing the nature of the alleged offence. The court observed that the offence was personal in nature and, with the informant’s consent, found no impediment to granting relief. Accordingly, the court allowed the petition as per prayer clauses ‘C’ and ‘C‑1’ and quantified fees for the appointed counsel at Rs. 10,000.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal writ petition can be granted when the parties have settled the dispute and the informant raises no objection, despite the personal nature of the alleged offence

Subjects

criminal writ petition
settlement
personal offence
informant consent
court discretion

Judgment

                                 -1-
                                                     criwp1510.24.odt

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

         960 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1510 OF 2024

Sudam S/ Shivraj Dudhbhate & others              ….Petitioner

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & another               …..Respondents

Mr. V. D. Gunale, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. P. Joshi, APP for the State.
Ms. D. S. Patil, Advocate (appointed) for the informant.


                              CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
                              DATE : 29th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
PER COURT :


1.      Learned Counsel for contesting parties makes a statement

that the parties have settled the dispute and infact by consent, decree

of divorce has been passed. Learned Counsel for the informant, on

instructions, makes a statement that informant has no objection if

the petition is allowed.



2.    Copies of order dated 01.09.2026 passed in HMP No. 58/2026

and certified copy of the pursis filed in PWDV No. 66/2024 are taken

on record.
                                 -2-
                                                    criwp1510.24.odt

3.    Learned APP opposed grant of petition by referring to the

offence and its nature.



4.    Prima facie perusal of the record indicates that the offence

alleged against the Petitioner is personal in nature. Since informant

has recorded no objection, this Court has no impediment in allowing

the petition.   Accordingly, petition is allowed in terms of prayer

clauses ‘C’ and ‘C-1’.



5.    Fees of the appointed counsel is quantified at Rs. 10,000/-.



                                                ( R. M. JOSHI, J.)

dyb

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…