Bombay High Court

NADIR FRAMROZ LANGRANA AND ORS (SINCE DECEASED) (DELETED)versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Decided: 11 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Court quashed the FIRs and charge‑sheets in all four matters and ordered the applicants to pay costs to a charitable trust.

Summary

The parties, all trustees or former trustees of a trust, were involved in a civil dispute over trust property that was settled through a consent decree in a 2025 civil suit. Following the settlement, the complainants sought to withdraw criminal proceedings initiated under various IPC offences by filing applications and writ petitions under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which mirrors Section 482 of the CrPC. The High Court examined its inherent powers to quash FIRs and charge‑sheets when the dispute is purely private, non‑heinous, and the prosecution would be an abuse of process. Citing the Supreme Court’s guidelines in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the Court held that consent quashing is permissible in such circumstances. It ordered the FIRs and charge‑sheets in all four matters to be quashed and directed the applicants to pay Rs 10,000 each to a charitable trust as costs, and the matters were disposed.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can quash FIRs and charge‑sheets by consent under Section 528 BNSS in view of a civil settlement between the parties.
Whether the offences alleged (IPC 406, 419, 420, 34, 409) are non‑heinous enough to permit quashing.
Whether costs should be imposed on the applicants for initiating criminal proceedings that were later withdrawn.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 119, 329(3), 351(2), 352
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 406, 409, 419, 420

Subjects

consent quashing
inherent powers
Section 528 BNSS
Section 482 CrPC
trust dispute
civil settlement
costs in criminal proceedings
FIR quash

Judgment

129. APL-1243-26 159 & 160.odt

Amberkar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1243 OF 2026

Percy Erach Pestonji .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents

WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1132 OF 2026

Mahrukh Feeroz Haradhvala .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents

WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2872 OF 2026

Pradeep Janardhan Nile & Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents

WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3016 OF 2026

Cyrus Kersi Langrana & Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents
....................
 Mr. Vishwajit Patil a/w Mr. Dnyaneshwar Jadhav & Ms. Gayatri
Mane i/by Legasis Partners, Advocates for Applicant in APL
1243/2026 &1132/2026
 Ms. Priyanka Machado & Laleh Pandole i/by Vashi & Vashi,
Advocates for Petitioners in WP 2872/2026 & 3016/2026
 Mr. Yogesh M. Nakhwa, APP for State
 Ms. Priyanka Machado & Laleh Pandole i/by Vashi & Vashi,
Advocates for Respondent No. 2 in CRI APL 1243/2026 &
1132/2026
...................

1 of 10
129. APL-1243-26 159 & 160.odt

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 11, 2026
P. C.:

1. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties.

2. Criminal Application No. 1132 of 2026 is not on board today,

By consent of the parties, same is taken on board.

3. The above captioned four matters are being decided together

by this common order.

4. Criminal Application No. 1243 of 2026 is filed under Section

528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash

and set aside the FIR bearing No. 0319 of 2024 dated 08.08.2024

registered with Matunga Police Station, Mumbai for offences

punishable under Sections 406, 419, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 as well as Chargesheet dated 09.02.2026 filed pursuant

thereto before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, 30th Court,

Kurla, Mumbai together with all consequential proceedings arising

therefrom, insofar as they relate to the Applicant.

4.1. Criminal Application No. 1132 of 2026 is filed under Section

528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash

and set aside the FIR bearing No. 0319 of 2024 dated 08.08.2024

registered with Matunga Police Station, Mumbai for offences

punishable under Sections 406, 419, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal

2 of 10
129. APL-1243-26 159 & 160.odt

Code, 1860 as well as Chargesheet dated 09.02.2026 filed pursuant

thereto before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, 30th Court,

Kurla, Mumbai together with all consequential proceedings arising

therefrom, insofar as they relate to the Applicant.

4.2. Criminal Writ Petition No. 2872 of 2026 is filed under Section

528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding

to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeking to

quash and set aside the FIR No. 158 of 2025 dated 31.01.2025

registered with Bandra Police Station, Mumbai under Section 119,

329(3), 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and

Chargesheet No. 1 dated 21.04.2026 filed by Respondent No. 1 before

the Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Bandra on 13.07.2026

and

4.3. Criminal Writ Petition No. 3016 of 2026 is filed under Section

528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding

to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeking to

quash and set aside the FIR No. 1188 of 2024 dated 16.08.2024

registered with Bandra Police Station, Mumbai under Sections 409 and

420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal code, 1860.

4.4. The Complainant is a former Trustee of the Trust. All

Applicants / Petitioners are trustees / former trustees of the Trust.

3 of 10
129. APL-1243-26 159 & 160.odt

They are known to each other for a long time. Some dispute arose

with regard to the trust property and handling and misappropriation

of trust funds. The disputes have now been reconciled pursuant to

Civil Suit proceedings filed in 2025. The amounts have now been

returned back by the Applicants / Petitioners. Suit No. 10 of 2025 has

been settled by virtue of filing Consent Terms by the parties thereto

who are the same parties before me. In that view of the matter, the

parties have approached the Court to put an end to the criminal

proceedings by consent quashing.

5. All four consent affidavits dated 09.07.2026, 22.06.2026,

11.09.2026 and 20.05.2026 of the Complainants filed in respective

matters which are taken on record. I have perused the same. Some

parties are present in Court and some are present on VC. I have

interacted with them. They all persuade the Court to quash the

criminal proceedings by consent quashing. In view of the aforesaid

facts, I am inclined to accept the request made by the parties and

allow the present Applications / Petitions so that the parties can live

their future lives without the ignominy of the criminal proceedings.

6. Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 conferred

inherent powers on High Courts to pass such orders as are justified to

give effect to any order in the Court, prevent abuse of process of any

Court or secure the ends of justice. In the BNSS this provision stands

4 of 10
129. APL-1243-26 159 & 160.odt

incorporated with Section 528 which substantially reproduces the

language and intent of Section 482 of the CRPC, 1973 High Courts

invoke this provision to step in where cases have been instituted with

malafide motives or to harass the accused person thereby avoiding

procedural harassment. It empowers Court to dismiss FIRs or criminal

proceedings if there is no prima facie case or evidence against the

accused person/s or if orders are made in violation of the principles of

natural justice. The exercise of such powers under Section 482 of

CRPC and now Section 528 of BNSS remains discretionary and varies

from case to case.

7. In State of Harayana vs Bhajan Lal1 the Supreme Court laid

down model categories and guidelines in paragraph No. 102 of the

said judgment in which the FIRs can be quashed. The Supreme Court

has furthered asserted that power under Section 482 is an

acknowledgment of "powers inherent" and not the source of powers

additional. It has held that even non compoundable offences can be

quashed where necessary. It has held that High Courts have to decide

whether the prosecution of an offence would further or be against the

interest of justice. It is also held that grievous offences such as murder,

rape, and dacoity cannot ordinarily be quashed even after settlement

because they involve societal implication.

1 1992 AIR 604

5 of 10
129. APL-1243-26 159 & 160.odt

8. In the above context, when parties settle their private dispute or

the lis between them is purely civil and commercial or matrimonial

and the offence is not heinous or does not impact the society at large,

the Court can consider such request. In such a case awarding costs for

putting the criminal law into motion on the act of the accused persons

and thereafter both parties seeking quashing of proceedings by

consent, in my opinion, can be considered by Court which can impose

costs on the parties, especially so in matters coming before the Court

by “consent quashing”.

9. For above levy of costs the legal principle rests on the logic that

criminal law cannot be used as a bargaining chip or a tool for private

settlements after draining the State and judicial resources. In simple

words, Courts cannot be used as a recovery mechanism to settle scores

and/or bring the parties into subjugation. I am of the firm opinion that

imposition of costs in consent quashing matters is required to be levied

for three main reasons viz., wastage of public resources, consumption

of valuable judicial time and for deterrence against vexatious

litigation. This is because after criminal machinery is set into motion,

the Police Department is forced to take cognizance, conduct

investigations, attend courts, deploy personnel, collect evidence and

draft chargesheets, all using public funds/ public exchequer. Equally

substantial judicial time of the Trial Courts and Sessions Courts is

6 of 10
129. APL-1243-26 159 & 160.odt

wasted for handling a case, presentation of a case, issuance of

summons, scheduling of trial dates, appointment of prosecutors and

their fees, etc. and ultimately if consent quashing is allowed such

judicial time stands completely wasted, which could have otherwise

been used for genuine Trial Court matters/ litigation. in one way such

matters result in clogging the legal system and lead to humongous

pendency which becomes difficult to tackle.

10. Another aspect to consider for imposing costs is that it curbs the

growing trend of filing strategically exaggerated criminal complaints

(especially matrimonial or commercial disputes) simply to force

financial and legal settlements. In a given case made out on merits of

the matter, even the Complainant can be put to costs while considering

a quashing Petition purely on merits depending upon the facts of each

case before Court. In some strong circumstances, even the State

machinery can be put to costs if a purely civil dispute between parties

strongly emanating from the facts on record is registered as criminal

case and given the flavor of criminality. This Court is also equally

conscious about not imposing costs blindly or mechanically if a

particular party is not found to be remiss or at explicit fault for

abusing the law, as also conscious about heinous offences impacting

the society at large while considering consent quashing.

7 of 10
129. APL-1243-26 159 & 160.odt

11. Applying the aforesaid principles to the facts of the present case,

I am of the opinion that the Applicants in two Applications for their

actions resulting in the Complainant invoking criminal proceedings

and now both the sides seeking quashing by consent, the two

Applicants before me should pay costs. Hence, Applicant in

Application Nos. 1243/2026 & 1132/2026 are directed to pay costs of

Rs. 10,000/- each towards the Corpus of A.K. Munshi Yojana a trust

which runs medical centres, vocational training centres and which also

runs a Special School called J.T. Sheth Mandbuddhi Vikas Kendra,

imparting education and training to the needs of 150 special children

in the field of Education (Classes for 6 to 18 years), early intervention

(upto 6 years) and vocational training (18 years above) having its

school address and building at A.K. Munshi Yojana Chowk, 3 rd

Panjarapole Lane, C.P. Tank, Mumbai – 400 004 [Contact Nos.

22425513 / 22423654] registered under the Society Registration Act,

XXI of 1980 under No. : 387/81 GBBSD and the Public Trust Act, XXIX

of 1950 under No. F-6809. RCI Reg. No. 0163.

12. Applicants and Petitioners are present in Court and through

their Advocates agree to pay the aforesaid costs amount to the charity

within a period of two weeks from today.

8 of 10
129. APL-1243-26 159 & 160.odt

13. In view of the above matter, both the Criminal Applicants as also

both the Petitions are allowed subject to payment of costs as directed

herein above. They are so allowed as under:-

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1243 OF 2026:-

“(a) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the
FIR bearing No. 0319 of 2024 dated 08.08.2024 registered with
Matunga Police Station, Mumbai for offences punishable under
Sections 406, 419, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as
well as Chargesheet dated 09.02.2026 filed pursuant thereto
before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, 30th Court,
Kurla, Mumbai together with all consequential proceedings
arising therefrom, insofar as they relate to the Applicant."

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1132 OF 2026:-

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2872 OF 2026 :-

“(a) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to invoke its
extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India as well as Inherent powers under Section
528 of BNSS thereby quash and set aside the FIR No. 158 of 2025
dated 31.01.2025 registered with Bandra Police Station, Mumbai
under Sections 119, 329(3), 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023;
(a-1) this Hon'ble Court be pleased to invoke its extraordinary writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as well
as Inherent powers under Section 528 of BNSS thereby quash and
set aside and Chargesheet No. 1 dated 21.04.2026 filed by
Respondent No. 1 before the Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate, First
Class at Bandra on 13.07.2026 ."

9 of 10
129. APL-1243-26 159 & 160.odt

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3016 OF 2026 :-

“a. this Hon'ble Court be pleased to invoke its extraordinary writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as well
as Inherent powers under Section 528 of BNSS thereby quash and
set aside the FIR No. 1188 of 2024 dated 16.08.2024 registered
with Bandra Police Station, Mumbai under Sections 409 and 420
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal code, 1860;
b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 1 i.e.
State of Maharashtra acting through Bandra Police Station,
Mumbai to forthwith de-freeze the Trust Account."

14. List both Criminal Applications and both Writ Petitions for

compliance of the order on 17th October, 2026.

15. Advocate for Applicants shall remain present and show

compliance on that date. If he does not remain present and there is

non-compliance of this order, Court will pass appropriate order for

recall of this order, which shall be noted by the Applicants.

16. Criminal Application Nos. 1243 of 2026 and 1132 of 2026 and

Criminal Writ Petition Nos. 2872 of 2026 and 3016 of 2026 are

allowed and disposed.

Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
RAVINDRA by RAVINDRA
MOHAN
MOHAN AMBERKAR
AMBERKAR Date: 2026.09.15
15:29:52 +0530

10 of 10

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…