Bombay High Court
MILIND RAMBHAVU KAMBLE AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The petition is allowed and the FIR No.22 of 2026 is quashed and set aside.
Summary
The petitioners were accused in FIR No.22 of 2026 for offences including cheating, forgery and intimidation arising from a commercial dispute over immovable property with Respondent No.2. The dispute was already litigated in a civil suit (Special Civil Suit No. 75 of 2025) which resulted in a decree and a settlement agreement, including a consent affidavit to quash the criminal case. The petitioners filed a writ petition seeking quashing of the FIR on the basis of the parties' consent and the settled civil decree. The Court examined the consent affidavit, the civil decree, and the parties' agreement, and found no impediment to granting the petition. Accordingly, the Court allowed the petition, quashing and setting aside the FIR and directing the petitioners to pay costs to a charitable institution.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR can be quashed on the basis of a consent affidavit and a settled civil decree between the parties.
- Whether the parties' agreement to not pursue further criminal proceedings is sufficient to bar continuation of the criminal prosecution.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 229, 318(4), 319(2), 33(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 61(2)
Subjects
- quash FIR
- consent affidavit
- compromise decree
- civil suit settlement
- cheating
- forgery
- criminal appellate jurisdiction
- specific performance
Judgment
15. CRI WP-3934-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 3934 OF 2026
Milind Rambhavu Kamble & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Chandak Aditya (through VC), Advocate for Petitioners
Ms. Rajeshree V. Newton, APP for State
Ms. Gaurangi Chaudhari & Ms. Shubhashree Yewale i/by YNA Legal
LLP, Advocates for Respondent No. 2
Ms. Puja Sanjeev Karambelkar, Respondent No. 2
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 29, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Chandak, learned Advocate for Petitioners; Ms.
Newton, learned APP for State and Ms. Chaudhari, learned Advocate
for Respondent No. 2.
2. On 20.08.2026, this Court passed the following order:-
"1. Heard Mr. Chandak, learned Advocate for the Petitioner on
Video Conferencing (VC) and Mr. Palkar, APP for Respondent–State.
2. The present Petition is filed for quashing of FIR No.22 of 2026
dated 17th February, 2026, registered with Igatpuri Police Station,
District – Nashik for offences punishable under Sections 229, 338,
33(3), 318(4), 319(2), 340(2), 351(2), 352, 61(2), 3(5) of the
BNS, 2023. Admittedly, there is a dispute between the Petitioner
and private informant complainant Respondent NO.2 with regard to a
proposed commercial transaction for development and sale of an
immovable property in Igatppuri. There was also a Memorandum of
Understanding executed between them, which ultimately landed in the Civil
Court, and Special Civil Suit No. 75 of 2025 was instituted before the Civil
Judge, Senior Division, Igatpuri, seeking specific performance thereof.
However, during the pendency of the said proceedings, Respondent No. 2
also lodged the present FIR alleging cheating and forgery, as also
1 of 4
15. CRI WP-3934-26.odt
intimidation. The civil suit stands fully decreed, and Mr. Chandak has
drawn my attention to the decree passed by the Civil Court, a copy of which
is appended at Page No. 89 of the Petition. The consent terms which were
filed between the parties therein not only put an end to the lease between
the parties, but the parties also agreed that the present FIR would be
quashed by filing an appropriate Petition in this Court. Hence, the present
Petition.
3. Today, when the matter is called out, and despite Respondent
No. 2 having been informed about the matter today, she is not present,
nor is she represented by Advocate. Mr. Chandak, appearing on VC, is
handicapped. He would submit that he will convey to Respondent No.
2 to remain present, but he does not know the reason as to why she is
not present. Hence, I am inclined to issue notice to Respondent No. 2
and direct her to remain present either physically or online and
confirm the aforesaid submissions made by Mr. Chandak, which are
even otherwise prima facie borne out by the record placed before me
in the present Petition.
4. Issue notice to Respondent No.2, returnable on 27th
August, 2026.
5. Stand over to 27th August, 2026. To be listed First on Board."
3. This is a Petition for quashing by consent of the parties.
Petitioners have been indicted in the offences relating to cheating and
forgery.
4. I have perused the papers and the material placed before me.
Admittedly, there has been agreement between the parties qua the
subject properties as also Civil Suit which has been settled which is
stated in the additional affidavit filed by Respondent No. 2.
5. I have perused the Consent Affidavit. Petitioners are directed to
file an undertaking to this Court that they shall not initiate or pursue
any fresh proceedings against the complainant arising out of the same
cause of action unless expressly required. Mr. Chandak who appears
on VC for Petitioners undertakes to do so. Rights and obligations
2 of 4
15. CRI WP-3934-26.odt
otherwise which are stated between the parties and agreed between
the parties shall be abided by the parties as per the consent affidavit.
Affidavit of consent of Respondent No. 2 is taken on record.
Respondent No 2 is present on VC. She confirms filing of the said
Consent Affidavit.
6. In view of the aforementioned lis between the parties and the
compromise decree as also the Consent Affidavit, criminal prosecution
qua the FIR No. 22 of 2026 is quashed and set aside thereby allowing
the parties to lead their normal lives.
7. In view of the aforesaid observations and findings and consent
given by Respondent No. 2 - complainant, I see no impediment in
allowing the present Petition. Hence, the Petition stands allowed in
terms of prayer clauses (a) & (b) which read thus:-
"a. The present petition be allowed.
b. The FIR No. 22 of 206 dated 17.02.2026 registered with Igatpuri
Police Station, Nashik registered under Sections 229, 338, 33(3),
318(4), 319(2), 340(2), 351(2), 352, 61(2), 3(5) of BNS along with
the chargesheet as the case may be, may kindly be quashed and set
aside."
8. Since the parties have put the law into motion, determination of
Petitions shall be however subject to payment of costs by the
Petitioners . Hence, Petition is allowed subject to payment of costs of
Rs. 25,000/- by the Petitioners to a charity namely A.K. Munshi
Yojana’s J.T. Sheth Mandbuddhi Vikas Kendra, a Special School
3 of 4
15. CRI WP-3934-26.odt
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,
3rd 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 within a period of two
weeks from the date of uploading of this order as a condition for
allowing the present Petition.
9. Though the present Petition is disposed of, same is kept for
compliance of this order on 11th September, 2026 under the caption
"for Compliance".
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
AMBERKAR
MOHAN Date:
AMBERKAR 2026.08.29
18:11:58
+0530
4 of 4
Checking your session…