Bombay High Court
SURESH KACHRU KURLEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The petition was allowed and the FIR was quashed on the basis of the parties' consent settlement.
Summary
The petitioner, Suresh Kachru Kurle, filed a criminal writ petition challenging FIR No. 101 of 2017 registered at Mahatma Phule Police Station, Kalyan, which alleged offences under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code. Both parties consented to settle the matter out of court and submitted consent terms, which were recorded by the court. The court examined the consent and, finding the parties in agreement, decided to quash the FIR. Consequently, the petition was allowed, the FIR was set aside, and the petitioner was ordered to pay a cost of Rs.5,000 to Tata Cancer Hospital. The writ petition was thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR alleging offences under the IPC can be quashed on the basis of a settlement between the petitioner and the complainant.
- Whether the court may impose a cost order in a criminal writ petition where the matter is settled.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 109, 143, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 326, 329, 34, 341, 427, 504, 506
Subjects
- consent settlement
- criminal procedure
- quash FIR
- Indian Penal Code
- cost order
- Bombay High Court
- criminal writ petition
Judgment
102-WP-4060-2022 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4060 OF 2022
Suresh Kachru Kurle … Petitioner
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra And Anr. … Respondents
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. Sonu Randive, Advocate for Petitioner.
SONALI
SATISH
Digitally signed
by SONALI
SATISH KILAJE
Date:
2026.05.05
Ms. Gauri Rao, APP for the Respondent-State.
KILAJE 12:49:15
Ms. Swapna Kode (Through VC), Advocate for Respondent No.2.
+0700
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 30th APRIL, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP and
learned counsel for respondent No.2.
2. Both the learned counsel submit that the matter is settled out of
the Court. Both the learned counsel tendered Consent Terms. It is taken
on record and marked “X” for identification.
3. The applicant and original complainant i.e. respondent No.2 are
present before the Court, this Court enquired with them. They agreed for
the consent terms and their signatures on it.
4. In view of above, I pass following order:
Page 1 of 2
102-WP-4060-2022 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
ORDER
(i) Petition is allowed.
(ii) C.R. No. 101 of 2017 registered with Mahatma Phule
Police Station, Kalyan, against the petitioner for an
offence punishable under Sections 307, 329, 109, 341,
326, 324, 323, 504, 506, 143, 148, 149, 427, 34 of Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) is quashed and set
aside.
(ii) The petitioner shall pay cost of Rs.5,000/- to TATA
Cancer Hospital.
5. Writ petition is disposed of.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…