Bombay High Court
KAMALA LANDMARE CARS PVT LTD.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- ASHWIN D BHOBE
Holding
The Court held that, in view of the amicable settlement and the complainant's affidavit, the FIR and the charge‑sheet may be quashed.
Summary
Kamala Landmarc Cars Pvt Ltd. and another filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quash of FIR No. 32 of 2016 (re‑numbered FIR No. 5 of 2023) registered at Borivali Police Station for offences under IPC Sections 406, 420 and 34, and the related charge‑sheet pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Respondent No. 2, the complainant, submitted an affidavit stating that the commercial dispute with the petitioners had been amicably resolved and she had no objection to the quashing of the criminal proceedings. The State argued that the criminal case was a misuse of police machinery but concurred that continuation served no purpose after the settlement. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Gian Singh, Narinder Singh, Parbatbhai Aahir), the Court held that there was no impediment to quash the FIR and charge‑sheet. Consequently, the FIR and the pending criminal case were quashed and the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings can be quashed when the complainant and the accused have amicably settled the underlying commercial dispute and the complainant has filed an affidavit expressing no objection.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528
- Constitution of India — s. Article 226
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 406, 420
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- quashing FIR
- settlement of dispute
- Section 528
- Article 226
- Economic Offences Wing
- IPC Sections 406, 420, 34
- writ petition
- amicable settlement
Judgment
Gitalaxmi 54-WP-2125-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 2125 OF 2024
Kamala Landmarc Cars Pvt Ltd. And Anr. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra And Anr. ...Respondents
__________
Mr. Murtaza Najmi a/w Mr. Dilip H. Shukla, Ms. Nancy, Mr. Kashish M.
Singhi, Mr. Shaikh Faizan & Ms. Sujata Bule, learned Advocates for the
Petitioners.
Petitioners are present in the Court.
Mr. Prasanna P. Malshe, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent.
Ms. Davinder Kaur Sabharwal, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
Respondent No. 2 is appearing through VC.
__________
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 17th FEBRUARY 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr. Murtaza Najmi, learned Advocate for the
Petitioners, Mr. Prasanna Malshe, learned A.P.P. for the
State/Respondent and Ms. Davinder Sabharwal, 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. 32 of 2016 dated 21.01.2016
registered with Borivali Police Station, Mumbai for the offences
punishable under Sections 406 & 420 read with Section 34 of the
Page 1 of 4
Gitalaxmi 54-WP-2125-2024.doc
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (re-numbered as FIR No. 5 of 2023 dated
03.02.2023 transferred to Economic Offences Wing, Mumbai) and
the charge-sheet bearing Criminal Case No. 376/PW/2023 pending
before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 47 th
Court, Esplanade, Mumbai, arising out of the said FIR.
3. Mr. Jitendra Jain, the Director of Petitioner No. 1 Company &
Petitioner No. 2 are present in the Court along with their Advocate
Mr. Murtaza Najmi. Both the Petitioners are identified by Advocate
Mr. Murtaza Najmi. Mr. Murtaza Najmi tenders photostat copies of
Aadhar Cards of the Director of Petitioner No. 1 Company &
Petitioner No. 2 as photo identity proof and photostat copy of the
Certificate of Incorporation of Petitioner No. 1 Company. The same
are taken on record and marked as “X Colly.” for identification.
4. Respondent No. 2, appears through Video Conference as she
has medical conditions resulting in difficulties to travel out of her
house, as stated by her Advocate Ms. Davinder Sabharwal. Ms.
Davinder Sabharwal identifies Respondent No. 2 and tenders
photostat copy of Aadhar Card of Respondent No. 2 as photo
identity proof, which is taken on record and marked as “X-1” for
identification.
5. Ms. Davinder Sabharwal tenders an Affidavit dated
18.12.2025 affirmed by Respondent No. 2 before the Notary
Advocate Mr. Tribhuwanth N. Sharma, Mumbai. Same is taken on
record and marked as “X-2” for identification. Respondent No. 2
appearing through Video Conference, states that she has filed the
said Affidavit dated 18.12.2025 (X-2) out of her own free will and
Page 2 of 4
Gitalaxmi 54-WP-2125-2024.doc
without any pressure, force or coercion from any person. She
states that the contents of Affidavit (X-2) are as per her say. She
reiterates that the dispute between her and the Petitioners is
amicably resolved, as such she gives No Objection for quashing of
the criminal proceedings initiated at her instance.
6. Mr. Murtaza Najmi and Ms. Davinder Sabharwal relying on
the Affidavit (X-2) filed by Respondent No. 2 submit that the
commercial dispute between the Petitioners and Respondent No. 2
is amicably resolved. They submit that the Petitioners and
Respondent No. 2 have resolved the entire controversy/dispute and
therefore, Respondent No. 2 has agreed to withdraw all criminal
proceedings filed by her against the Petitioners. They therefore
request that the criminal proceedings may not be continued and
the same be quashed.
7. Mr. Prasanna Malshe, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent
states that a purely commercial transaction was given a cloak of
criminal proceedings and the police machinery was used to settle
this dispute. He submits that though the police machinery was put
in action on the basis of the complaint filed by Respondent No. 2,
however Petitioners and Respondent No. 2 having now resolved
their dispute and Respondent No. 2 giving her No Objection for
quashing of the criminal proceedings read with her statements in
the Affidavit (X-2), no purpose would be served by continuing with
the criminal proceedings. He therefore submits that the impugned
FIR and the criminal proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR
be quashed.
Page 3 of 4
Gitalaxmi 54-WP-2125-2024.doc
8. Considering the facts as placed before me, the nature of
dispute, the matter being amicably settled between the Petitioners
and Respondent No. 2, the statements made on oath by
Respondent No. 2 (Affidavit at X-2) and having regards to the
pronouncements of 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, there is no impediment in allowing this Criminal
Writ Petition.
9. In view of the above, Criminal Writ Petition is allowed in
terms of prayer clause (a). Consequently, the impugned FIR
bearing No. 32 of 2016 dated 21.01.2016 registered with Borivali
Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections
406 & 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
(re-numbered as FIR No. 5 of 2023 dated 03.02.2023 transferred
to Economic Offences Wing, Mumbai) and the subsequent charge-
sheet bearing Criminal Case No. 376/PW/2023 pending before the
learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 47 th Court,
Esplanade, Mumbai, arising out of the impugned 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. 2125 of 2024 is disposed of. No
order as to costs.
[ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.]
GITALAXMI 1. (2012)10 Supreme Court Cases 303.
KRISHNA
KOTAWADEKAR 2. (2014)6 Supreme Court Cases 466.
3. (2017) 9 SCC 641.
Digitally signed Page 4 of 4
by GITALAXMI
KRISHNA
KOTAWADEKAR
Date: 2026.02.25
21:08:03 +0530
Checking your session…