JOASH CHRISTOPHER ASIRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

                                                        24-WP-2612-2026.doc


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
               CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2612 OF 2026
Joash Christopher Asir                               … Petitioner
     Versus.
The State of Maharashtra And Anr.                   … Respondents
                              -----
Ms. Kajal Singh, for the Petitioner.
Ms. Angana Sarmah, for the Respondent No. 2
Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for the Respondent – State.
                                 -------

                                CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
                                 DATE : 7th July, 2026.
P.C. :


1.       Heard Ms. Kajal Singh, learned Advocate for the Petitioner,

Ms. Angana Sarmah, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 2

and Mr. Ameet Palkar, learned APP for the Respondent-State.



2.       This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

and under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,

2023, is preferred by the Petitioner for quashing the FIR bearing

291 of 2024, dated 28.04.2024, registered with Bhandup Police

Station, for offences punishable under Sections 279 and 338 of the

Indian Penal Code (impugned FIR) and for quashing the charge-

Vivekanand                                 1
                                                        24-WP-2612-2026.doc


sheet        bearing   CC   No.403/PS/2024,   pending   before         the

Metropolitan Magistrate, 53rd Court, Mulund, Mumbai.



3.      Ms. Kajal Singh, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Ms.

Angana Sarmah, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 2,

submit that the subject matter of the impugned FIR and the

criminal proceedings is an accident involving the motorcycle

ridden by the Petitioner and the Respondent No.2 pedestrian. They

submit that the accident resulted from contributory negligence by

both the Petitioner and the Respondent No. 2. They submit that

the Respondent No. 2 sustained minor injuries in the said accident.

They submit that the Petitioner assisted the Respondent No. 2 and

provided her with all the required medical assistance. They submit

that the Respondent No. 2 filed proceedings before the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Mumbai, registered as MACT Case No.

1185 of 2024, which was settled before the Lok Adalat vide Award

dated 13.09.2025, in view of the amicable resolution between the

parties. They submit that the Petitioner has paid the amount to the

Respondent No. 2 in terms of the award. They submit that, in view

of the settlement, the Respondent No. 2 has no given her no


Vivekanand                             2
                                                       24-WP-2612-2026.doc


objection in her Affidavit. They, therefore, request the quashing of

the impugned FIR and the criminal proceedings arising therefrom.


2.      Petitioner is present in the Court and is represented by his
Advocate, Ms. Kajal Singh. She tenders the photostat copy of the
Petitioner’s Identity Card, which is taken on record and marked as
“X” for identification.

3.      Respondent No.2 is present in the Court and is identified by
her Advocate Ms. Angana Sarmah. She tenders the Photostat copy
of Identity Card of Respondent No.2, which is taken on record and
marked as “X-1” for identification.

4.      Ms. Angana Sarmah, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2,
states that the Affidavit dated 21.05.2026, affirmed by Respondent
No.2 before Notary Mr. Balaji Lakhame, Mumbai, is on record
(page nos. 74 to 78 of the paper book). The same is marked with
“X-2” for identification.

5.      Respondent No. 2, submits that Respondent No. 2 has
received the compensation awarded in the proceedings before the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mumbai in MACT Case No. 1185
of 2024. She states that the accident occurred due to her lapse.
She states that she has no grievance against the Petitioner. She
states that she does not intend to continue the criminal
proceedings and will not support the prosecution case. She relies
on paragraphs Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 of her Affidavit X-2, which are
reproduced verbatim.
Vivekanand                            3
                                                                24-WP-2612-2026.doc


       “3.    That the parties confirm that all claims, demands,
       grievances and disputes arising out of the incident have been
       fully and finally resolved.
       4.    That the Petitioner has also already compensated
       Respondent No. 2, and both parties wish to maintain a cordial
       and peaceful relationship going forward.
       5.      Both the Petitioner and Respondent No. 2 respectfully
       request the Hon’ble Court to consider this mutual settlement
       and consent and quash FIR No. 291 of 2024 and all criminal
       and civil proceedings arising therefrom in the interest of
       justice.
       6.      Both parties declare that this affidavit is made
       voluntarily without any pressure, coercion, or undue influence,
       solely for the purpose of amicable settlement and quashing of
       proceedings.”


6.      Mr. Ameet Palkar, learned APP for the Respondent-State,
submits that since the dispute arising out of the accident has been
amicably settled between the Petitioner and the Respondent No. 2,
the Respondent No. 1 does not oppose the quashing of the FIR and
the charge-sheet.

7.      Considering the above facts, the submissions of the learned
Advocates for the parties, the material on record not indicating
that the Petitioner was rash and negligent while riding his
motorcycle, the statement made by the Respondent No. 2 before
this Court, particularly her statement that she has no grievance
against the Petitioner and her no objection in her Affidavit (X-2) to
the quashing of the criminal proceedings, no useful purpose will be
served by allowing the criminal prosecution to continue. The



Vivekanand                                 4
                                                       24-WP-2612-2026.doc


Petitioner is a young student hence, continuation of the criminal
proceedings would hamper his career.

8.      Having regard to the pronouncements of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab 1, Narinder Singh
And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr2 and Parbatbhai Aahir @
Parbatbhai vs The State Of Gujarat3, there is no impediment in
allowing this Petition.

9.      In view of the above, this Petition is allowed in terms of
prayer clause (b). Consequently, the impugned FIR and the
Charge-sheet bearing CC No.403/PS/2024 are quashed.

10.     Ms. Kajal Singh, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, on
instructions from the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner
voluntarily offers to pay an additional amount of Rs. 25,000/- to
Respondent No. 2, which shall be transferred to the bank account
of Respondent No. 2.

11.     In view of the above, Criminal Writ Petition No.2612 of 2026
is disposed of.


                                           (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)




1       2012 10 SCC 303
2       2014 6 SCC 466
3       2017 9 SCC 641

Vivekanand                            5