Bombay High Court

ABDUL ZUBAIR KHAN AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Decided: 23 January 2026
Disposal: Allowed
Bench: ASHWIN D BHOBE

Holding

The Court held that, given the amicable settlement and the complainant’s free‑will affidavit, the FIR and the pending criminal proceedings must be quashed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

Summary

The petitioners filed a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quash of FIR No. 169 of 2020 and related criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 498‑A, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The dispute arose from a matrimonial conflict between the husband (Petitioner No.1) and the wife (Respondent No.2), which was later amicably resolved. The wife executed an affidavit stating she had no objection to the quash and that it was given voluntarily. The State also agreed that continuing the proceedings would serve no purpose. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court exercised its power under Section 528 to quash the FIR and the pending charge‑sheet, ordering the criminal proceedings closed and disposing of the petition.

Issues considered

Whether an FIR and pending criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 498‑A, 504, 506 IPC can be quashed under Section 528 of the BNSS when the complainant has voluntarily withdrawn objections.
Whether the court may rely on an affidavit of the complainant and an amicable settlement to exercise suo motu quash jurisdiction despite the seriousness of the alleged offences.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 498-A, 504, 506

Subjects

quash
FIR
matrimonial dispute
Section 528
BNSS
498-A
criminal proceedings
amicable settlement
affidavit
Article 226

Judgment

Gitalaxmi 922-WP-205-2026.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 205 OF 2026

Abdul Zubair Khan And Ors. ...Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra And Anr. ...Respondents
__________

Mr. Zoheb Merchant, learned Advocate for the Petitioners.
Petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 are present in the Court.

Mr. Tanveer G. Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent.
Mr. Galib Shaikh, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
Respondent No. 2 is present in the Court.
PSI Mr. M. T. Sable attached to Tulinj Police Station, District-Palghar is
present in the Court.
__________

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 23rd JANUARY 2026.

P.C. :

1. Heard Mr. Zoheb Merchant, learned Advocate for the
Petitioners, Mr. Tanveer Khan, learned A.P.P. for the
State/Respondent and Mr. Galib Shaikh, learned Advocate for
Respondent No. 2.

2. This Petition is preferred by the Petitioners under Article 226
of the Constitution of India and under Section 528 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of the First
Information Report bearing No. 169 of 2020 dated 13.02.2020
registered with Tulinj Police Station, District-Palghar for the
offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 504 & 506 read with
Page 1 of 4
Gitalaxmi 922-WP-205-2026.doc

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the criminal
proceedings bearing R.C.C. No. 1097 of 2022 (Charge-sheet No.
580 of 2021), pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Joint Civil Judge at Vasai, arising out of the said FIR.

3. Mr. Zoheb Merchant, learned Advocate for the Petitioners
states that Petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 are present in the Court. Mr. Galib
Shaikh, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2 states that
Respondent No. 2 is present in the Court. Photostat copies of
Aadhar Cards of all the Petitioners and Respondent No. 2 as photo
identity proof, duly certified by Mr. Zoheb Merchant and Mr. Galib
Shaikh, are tendered by the respective Advocates. Same are taken
on record and marked as “X Colly.” for identification.

4. Mr. Zoheb Merchant and Mr. Galib Shaikh jointly state that
the matrimonial dispute between Petitioner No. 1 (Husband) and
Respondent No. 2 (Wife) is amicably resolved, as such Respondent
No. 2 has No Objection for quashing of the criminal proceedings.
They therefore state that no purpose would be served in continuing
the criminal proceedings and the same be quashed.

5. Mr. Galib Shaikh, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2
tenders Affidavit dated 23.01.2026 affirmed by Respondent No. 2
before the Notary Advocate S. N. Dhange at Mumbai on
21.01.2026. Same is taken on record and marked as “X-1” for
identification. Respondent No. 2, who is present in the Court states
that the said Affidavit (X-1) has been filed by her out of her own
free will and without any pressure, force or coercion from any
person. She states that the contents of Affidavit (X-1) are as per

Page 2 of 4
Gitalaxmi 922-WP-205-2026.doc

her say. She by relying on paragraph nos. 3 to 7 of the Affidavit (X-
1) and submits that she has No Objection for quashing of the FIR
and subsequent criminal proceedings.

6. Petitioner Nos. 1 to 4, who are present in the Court state that
the matrimonial discord of Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2
is amicably resolved.

7. Mr. Tanveer G. Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent
states that no purpose would be served by continuing with the
criminal proceedings in view of the statements made by
Respondent No. 2 before this Court, as also her statements in the
Affidavit (X-1). He therefore submits that the impugned FIR and
the criminal proceedings can be quashed.

8. Having regards to the facts as placed before me, the nature of
dispute, the amicable settlement arrived between the parties, the
statements made on oath by Respondent No. 2 (Affidavit dated
23.01.2026 at X-1) and having regards to the judicial
pronouncements by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of
Gian Singh v/s. The State of Punjab and Another 1, Narinder Singh
and Others v/s. State of Punjab and Another 2 and Parbatbhai Aahir
Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinbhai Karmur and Others Vs. State of
Gujarat and Anr.3, to secure ends of justice I deem it fit and proper
to exercise powers under Section 528 of the BNSS to quash the
criminal proceedings.

1. (2012)10 Supreme Court Cases 303.
2. (2014)6 Supreme Court Cases 466.
3 (2017) 9 SCC 641.
Page 3 of 4
Gitalaxmi 922-WP-205-2026.doc

9. In view of the above, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer
clause (b). Consequently, the FIR bearing No. 169 of 2020 dated
13.02.2020 registered with Tulinj Police Station, District-Palghar
for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 504 & 506 read
with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the subsequent
criminal proceedings bearing R.C.C. No. 1097 of 2022 (Charge-
sheet No. 580 of 2021), pending before the Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Joint Civil Judge at Vasai, arising out of the said FIR,
are quashed. Criminal proceedings against the Petitioners arising
out of the impugned FIR and the charge-sheet are closed.

10. Criminal Writ Petition No. 205 of 2026 is disposed of. No
order as to costs.

[ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.]

Digitally signed
by GITALAXMI
GITALAXMI KRISHNA
KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR
KOTAWADEKAR Date:
2026.02.13
21:10:21 +0530

Page 4 of 4

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…