Bombay High Court
NIKHIL KISHOR SANSAREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
- Bench
- ASHWIN D BHOBE
Holding
The petition is allowed and the FIR and chargesheet are quashed subject to each party paying Rs.10,000 as costs.
Summary
The petitioner, Vaishali Anil Tikam, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quash of FIR No. 348 of 2017 and the pending chargesheet (Sessions Case No. 169 of 2018). The complainant (Respondent No.2) submitted an affidavit stating that the dispute has been resolved, she is now married and wishes to discontinue the criminal proceedings. Both parties agreed to pay Rs.10,000 each as costs. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (Gian Singh, Narinder Singh, Sandeep Singh Thakur), the Court held there was no impediment to quash the proceedings. The petition was allowed, the FIR and chargesheet were quashed, and the parties were directed to deposit the stipulated costs.
Issues considered
- Can criminal proceedings be quashed on the basis of a settlement and affidavit of the complainant under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023?
- Whether the court may impose costs on the parties in a petition for quashing criminal proceedings?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- quash of criminal proceedings
- settlement
- Section 528
- Article 226
- criminal writ petition
- costs
- FIR
- chargesheet
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
60- WP 399 of 2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 399 OF 2026
VAISHALI
ANIL
TIKAM
Digitally signed
Nikhil Kishor Sansare … Petitioner
by VAISHALI
ANIL TIKAM
Date:
V/s.
2026.01.31
17:37:06 +0530
State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents.
---
Mr. Vaibhav P. Punkekar a/w. Ms. Naseema F. Shaikh a/w. Mr.
Kunal Patil a/w. Ms. Asma Shaikh, Advocates for the Petitioner.
Mr. Prasanna P. Malshe, APP for the State- Respondent No.1.
Ms. Divya Parab a/w. Ms. Sana Mujawar, Advocate for Respondent
No.2.
---
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 28th JANUARY, 2026
P.C. :
1. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India and under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 is preferred against the FIR bearing C.R. No. 348
of 2017 registered with Ghatkopar Police Station and the
chargesheet registered as Sessions Case No. 169 of 2018 pending
Tikam 1
60- WP 399 of 2026.odt
before the Sessions Court, Court No. 41, Greater Mumbai.
2. Petitioner is present in Court with Advocate Mr.
Vaibhav Punkekar. Respondent No.2 is present in Court along
with her Advocate Ms. Divya Parab.
3. Mr. Vaibhav Punkekar, learned Advocate for the
Petitioner and Ms. Divya Parab, learned Advocate for Respondent
No.2 jointly submit that the Petitioner and Respondent No.2
have resolved their dispute. They submit that Respondent No.2 is
now married and is settled in life. They submit that in view of
the Petitioner and Respondent No.2 moving ahead in life,
Respondent No.2 does not intend to continue with the criminal
proceedings and, therefore, she has no objection for quashing of
the criminal proceedings registered on the basis of her complaint.
4. Ms Divya Parab, tenders Affidavit dated 28/01/2026
affirmed by her before the Notary Aliya N. Pathan, Greater
Mumbai along with photostat copies of the identity cards of the
Petitioner and Respondent No.2, same are taken on record and
marked "X" Collectively for identification.
5. Respondent No.2, who is present in Court states that
Tikam 2
60- WP 399 of 2026.odt
the Affidavit ("X" collectively) is filed out of her own free will and
without any force from any person. She states that the contents of
the Affidavit ("X"collectively) are as per her say. She states that
she having now settled in life and having married on 13/05/2022
is residing peacefully with her husband as such she does not wish
to carry on with the criminal proceedings. She states that she
wants to continue her life with dignity and peace.
6. Mr. Prasanna Malshe, learned APP for the State
submits that in view of the Affidavit ("X" collectively), no purpose
would be served in continuing the criminal proceedings against
the Petitioner. He submits that Respondent No.2, having now
married and the statements made by her in the Affidavit ("X"
collectively) the FIR and the chargesheet can be quashed. He,
however, insists for costs to be paid by the parties.
7. Mr. Vaibhav Punkekar, and Ms. Divya Parab, on
instructions from Petitioner and Respondent No.2 jointly submit
that they shall pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- each as cost.
8. They on instructions state that the cost will be
deposited within 10 days from today in the following account:
Tikam 3
60- WP 399 of 2026.odt
Name : Central Police Welfare Fund, M.S.,
Bank Name : Axis Bank
Branch : Worli, Mumbai.
Account No. :9140100029005759
IFSC Code : UTIB000060.
9. In view of the abovesaid circumstances, the Petitioner
and Respondent No.2 having resolved the dispute, Respondent
No.2 now settled in life, she being married and residing with her
husband, the statements made by her in her Affidavit ("X"
collectively), having regards to the pronouncement of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab1,
Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab and Anr. 2, Sandeep
Singh Thakur vs. Stae of Madhya Pradesh and Anr. 3, there is no
impediment for allowing the present Petition.
10. This Petition is therefore allowed in terms of prayer
clause (a) subject to payment of Rs.10,000/-each by Petitioner
and Respondent No. 2 as cost. Consequently, the FIR bearing
C.R.No. 348 of 2017 registered with Ghatkopar Police Station
and the chargesheet registered as Sessions Case No. 169 of
2018 which is pending before the Sessions Court, Court
1 (2012) 10 SCC 303.
2 (2014)6 SCC 466.
3 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2927.
Tikam 4
60- WP 399 of 2026.odt
No. 41, Greater Mumbai are quashed.
11. Writ Petition No. 399 of 2026 is disposed of in the
aforesaid terms.
12. List this matter for compliance on 16/02/2026.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Tikam 5
Checking your session…