Bombay High Court

SUMUKH SHAMRAJ PATHAKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Decided: 8 May 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: ASHWIN D BHOBE

Holding

The FIR is quashed as the matrimonial dispute has been amicably settled and there is no public interest in continuing the criminal proceedings.

Summary

The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 349/2025 registered at Panchvati Police Station, which alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice Act, on the ground that the dispute was a matrimonial one that had been amicably resolved. Respondent No.2, the wife of one petitioner, filed an affidavit stating her free‑will consent to the quashing of the FIR, and the State also consented. The Court examined whether a criminal proceeding could be terminated when the parties to a private dispute have settled and there is no public interest in continuation. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Gian Singh, Narinder Singh, Parbatbhai), the Court held that there is no impediment to quash the FIR in such circumstances. Consequently, all three writ petitions were allowed, the FIR was quashed, and one petitioner was ordered to pay costs.

Issues considered

Whether an FIR arising from a matrimonial dispute can be quashed under Article 226 and Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita when the parties have settled the dispute and the respondent consents.
Whether the consent affidavit and the State's lack of objection suffice to extinguish the criminal liability under the specified sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice Act.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 84
Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013 — s. 3(3)

Subjects

quashing FIR
matrimonial dispute
Section 528
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
criminal procedure
settlement
Article 226
High Court
consent affidavit

Judgment

Digitally
signed by
LAXMIKANT
LAXMIKANT GOPAL (2, 33, 51) WPS-5959.25, 6252.25&2519.26.DOCX
GOPAL CHANDAN
CHANDAN Date:
2026.05.09
12:27:33
+0530 lgc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.5959 OF 2025

Shreya Anand Sankhe @ Shreya
Shamraj Pathak : Petitioner
Versus.
The State of Maharashtra and anr. : Respondents

WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.6252 OF 2025

Medha Shamraj Pathak : Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and anr. : Respondents.

WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2519 OF 2026

Sumukh Shamraj Pathak : Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and anr. : Respondents.
_ -----
Mr. Gautam J Jain for the Petitioner in WP No.5959/2025.
Mr. Atharva Dandekar i/by Mr. Tejas Gupta for the Petitioner
in WP No.6252/2025.
Mr.Hitendra Parab for the Petitioner in WP No.2519/2026.
Mr. Shirish Gupte, Senior Advocate a/w Advocates Karan
Singh Rajput, Varun Thokal i/by Ms. Deepali Bagla for
Respondent No.2 in all three Petitions.
Ms. Pallavi Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent/State in WP
No.5959/2025.
Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for the Respondent/State in WP
No.6252/2025.
Ms. Shilpa Talhar, APP for the Respondent/State in WP
No.2519/2026.
IO PI Sunil Pawar Panchvati Police Station, present.
-------

1
(2, 33, 51) WPS-5959.25, 6252.25&2519.26.DOCX

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

DATED : 08 MAY 2026
PC:-

1. Mr. Gautam J Jain, learned Advocate for the Petitioner
in Writ Petition No.5959 of 2025, Mr. Atharva Dandekar,
learned Advocate for the Petitioner in Writ Petition
No.6252/2025, Mr. Hitendra Parab, learned Advocate for the
Petitioner in Writ Petition No.2519 of 2026, and Mr. Shirish
Gupte, learned Senior Advocate for Respondent No.2 in all
three Writ Petitions, submit that the subject matter of these
Writ Petitions is the FIR bearing No.0349/2025 dated 12 July
2025 registered with Panchvati Police Station. They submit
that the subject matter of these Petitions has been resolved
amongst all the parties and therefore request that these three
Petitions be taken up together and disposed of by a common
order.

2. Ms. Pallavi Dabholkar, Mr. Ameet Palkar and Ms. Shilpa
Talhar, learned APPs appearing for the Respondent/State in all
three Writ Petitions, consent to taking up these Petitions
together and disposing of them by a common order.

3. Heard learned Advocates for the parties in all three
Petitions.

2
(2, 33, 51) WPS-5959.25, 6252.25&2519.26.DOCX

4. These three Petitions under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India and under Section 528 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 are filed by the Petitioners
for quashing the FIR bearing No. 349 of 2025, dated 12 July
2025, registered with Panchvati Police Station (impugned
FIR), for offences punishable under Sections 84, 115(2),
126(2), 352, 351(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
and 3(3) of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of
Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori
Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013.

5. Mr. Gautam J Jain, learned Advocate for the Petitioner
in Writ Petition No.5959 of 2025, Mr. Atharva Dandekar,
learned Advocate for the Petitioner in Writ Petition
No.6252/2025, Mr. Hitendra Parab, learned Advocate for the
Petitioner in Writ Petition No.2519 of 2026 and Mr. Shirish
Gupte, learned Senior Advocate for Respondent No.2, submit
that the subject matter of the impugned FIR is a matrimonial
dispute between the Respondent No.2 and the Petitioners
herein. They submit that Petitioner – Shreya Anand Sankhe
(Sister-in-law of the Respondent No.2), Petitioner - Medha
Shamraj Pathak (mother-in-law of the Respondent No.2) and
Petitioner - Sumukh Shamraj Pathak (husband of the
Respondent No.2) have resolved the matrimonial dispute with
the Respondent No.2( wife of Sumukh Shamraj Pathak). They
submit that in view of the resolution of the matrimonial
dispute between the Respondent No.2 and the Petitioners, the
Respondent No.2 has given her no objection for quashing the

3
(2, 33, 51) WPS-5959.25, 6252.25&2519.26.DOCX

impugned FIR in three separate Affidavits dated 07 May 2026.
They on instructions submit that the parties have assured each
other of their abiding by the settlement terms. They therefore
request the quashing of the impugned FIR.

6. Shreya Anand Sankhe, the Petitioner in Writ Petition
No.5959 of 2025 is present in Court and is identified by her
Advocate Mr. Gautam Jain. He tenders photostat copy of
Petitioner’s identity card, which is taken on record and
marked as “X” for identification.

7. Medha Shamraj Pathak, the Petitioner in Writ Petition
No. 6252 of 2025 is present in Court and is identified by her
Advocate Mr. Ahtarva Dandekar. He tenders photostat copy of
Petitioner’s identity card, which is taken on record and
marked as “X” for identification.

8. Sumukh Shamraj Pathak, the Petitioner in Writ Petition
No.2519 of 2026 is present in Court and is identified by his
Advocate Mr. Hitendra Parab. He tenders photostat copy of
Petitioner’s identity card, which is taken on record and
marked as “X” for identification.

9. Respondent No.2 is present in the Court and is
identified by her Advocate Ms. Deepali Bagla. She tenders the
Photostat copy of Respondent No.2’s Identity Card separately
in all the three Petitions, which is taken on record and
independently marked as “X-1” for identification.

4
(2, 33, 51) WPS-5959.25, 6252.25&2519.26.DOCX

10. Ms. Deepali Bagla, learned Advocate for Respondent
No.2, states that three separate Affidavits dated 07 May 2026,
affirmed by Respondent No.2 before the Notary S. N. Dhange,
Fort, Mumbai, are placed on record in these Petitions. They
are independently marked as “X-2” for identification in the
respective Petitions.

11. Respondent No. 2 states that the said Affidavit (X-2) is
filed of her own free will and without any pressure or
coercion from any person. She states that the contents of the
Affidavit (X-2) are as per her say. She states that the complaint
she filed was due to the matrimonial discord she had with the
Petitioners. She states that the entire matrimonial dispute is
amicably resolved. She states that she has decided to part
ways with Sumukh Shamraj Pathak (husband). She states that
she and Sumukh Shamraj Pathak will apply to the Court for a
mutual divorce. She states that she does not want to continue
with the criminal proceedings and wants to settle in life. She
relies on the contents of Paragraph 6, which is the common
paragraph in all three Affidavits filed by Respondent No. 3 in
these Petitions and reiterates her no objection to the quashing
of the criminal proceedings. Paragraph 6 of the Affidavit (X-2)
is transcribed herein below in verbatim :-

“6. I say that without entering into the merits of the
matter, and based on the consent terms dated 7th May
2026 being executed between the parties, I hereby given
my No objection to the quashing of the FIR no.349 of 2024
registered at Panchvati Police Station, Nashik.”

5
(2, 33, 51) WPS-5959.25, 6252.25&2519.26.DOCX

12. Ms. Pallavi Dabbholkar, Mr. Ameet Palkar and Ms. Shilpa
Talhar, learned APPs for the Respondent No.1 -State, submit
that the matrimonial dispute between the parties being
amicably settled, Respondent No.1 -State does not object to
the quashing of the impugned FIR.

13. Considering the facts mentioned above, the submissions
of the learned Advocates for the parties, the matrimonial
dispute between the Petitioners and Respondent No.2 being
amicably resolved, the statements made by Respondent No.2
before this Court and in her Affidavit (X-2), her decision to
separate from Sumukh Shamraj Pathak (husband) and to
settle in life, no useful purpose would be served by continuing
the criminal proceedings.

14. Having regard to the pronouncements of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab1, Narinder
Singh and Ors vs State of Punjab and Anr 2 and Parbatbhai
Aahir @ Parbatbhai vs The State of Gujarat3, there is no
impediment in allowing these Petitions.

15. In view of the above, the following order is passed :-

A] Criminal Writ Petition No.5959 of 2025 is allowed
in terms of prayer clause (a).

B] Criminal Writ Petition No.6252 of 2025 is allowed
in terms of prayer clause (a).
1
2012 10 SCC 303
2
2014 6 SCC 466
3
2017 9 SCC 641

6
(2, 33, 51) WPS-5959.25, 6252.25&2519.26.DOCX

C] Criminal Writ Petition No.2519 of 2026 is allowed
in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to Petitioner –
Sumukh Shamraj Pathak paying costs of Rs. 25,000/-.
Payment of costs is a condition precedent.

D] Consequently, the impugned FIR in all three
Petitions is quashed.

E] The Petitioner (Sumukh Shamraj Pathak )shall
deposit the costs in the account mentioned below within
four weeks from today and file the compliance affidavit,
along with proof of deposit, in the Registry of this Court
on or before 15 June 2026.

F] The Petitioner (Sumukh Shamraj Pathak) shall
deposit the amount of Rs.25,000 in :-

The High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at
Mumbai
Account No.: 000120110001337
Bank : Bank of India
Branch : Mumbai Main
IFSC Code : BKID0000001

16. All three Writ Petition Nos. 5959 of 2025, 6252 of 2025
and 2519 of 2026 are disposed of.

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…