Bombay High Court
ROHITAS PARAMHANS PATHAKversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The High Court allowed all the writ petitions and quashed Crime No. 920 of 2019, subject to a cost order.
Summary
The petitioners Ratnakar Dubey, Rohitas Pathak, Sushil Tiwari and others were charged under Crime No. 920 of 2019 by the State of Maharashtra. They filed criminal writ petitions (Nos. 3815, 3816, 3817 of 2023 and ST 5546 of 2026) seeking quash of the FIR, contending that the matter had been settled out of court and the respondents had received the agreed amount. The respondents submitted settlement documents marked “X” and argued that the case should be closed. The High Court examined the settlement evidence and held that the settlement extinguished the public interest in continuing the prosecution. Consequently, the Court allowed all the writ petitions, quashed the FIR and ordered each petitioner to pay costs of Rs 10,000 to Tata Cancer Hospital. The petitions were thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding can be quashed on the ground that the parties have settled the dispute out of court
- Whether the High Court may entertain criminal writ petitions to set aside an FIR in view of a private settlement
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- settlement out of court
- quash of FIR
- writ petition
- High Court of Bombay
- cost order
Judgment
23-WP-3815-2023 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3815 OF 2023
Ratnakar Radhemohan Dubey … Petitioner
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra And Ors. … Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3817 OF 2023
Rohitas Paramhans Pathak … Petitioner
SONALI by
Digitally signed
SONALI
VERSUS
SATISH Date:
SATISH KILAJE
KILAJE 2026.05.05
14:41:14 +0700
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. … Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3816 OF 2023
Sushil Radheymohan Tiwari … Petitioner
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra And Ors. … Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 5546 OF 2026 (Not on Board)
Navneet Pancham Singh & Anr. … Petitioners
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra And Ors. … Respondents
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. K.M.Tripathi, Advocate for Petitioner in all Petitions.
Ms. Gauri Rao, APP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Ajay S. Jaiswal, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 to 5.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 30th APRIL, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the
Page 1 of 2
23-WP-3815-2023 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
State and learned counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 5.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Writ Petition
(St) No. 5546 of 2026 is arising out of the same crime, hence same be
tagged with the present Petitions. Considering his submission, Writ
Petition (St) No. 5546 of 2026 be tagged with the present Writ Petitions.
3. It is contention of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 5 that matters are settled out of the Court
and respondents have received their amount. Both the learned counsel
have tendered pursis stating that matter is settled out of the Court. All
documents are taken on record and marked “X” for identification. As the
matter is settled out of the Court, I pass following order :
ORDER
a. All Writ Petitions are allowed.
b. Crime No. 920 of 2019 registered against the petitioners is
quashed and set aside subject to payment of costs of
Rs.10,000/- in each Petition, to TATA Cancer Hospital.
4. All Writ Petitions are disposed of.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…