HEMANG JADAVJI SHAHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

                                                                      81.WP.4368.2026.doc

HARSHADA H. SAWANT
      (P.A.)
                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                               WRIT PETITION NO.4368 OF 2026

              Hemang Jadavji Shah                              .. Petitioner
                         Versus
              The State of Maharashtra and Anr.                .. Respondents
                                          ....................
               Mr. Niranjan Mundargi a/w. Mr. Munaf Virjee, Mr. Omkar Mulekar,
                Mr. Sakshi Joydand and Ms. Keral Mehta, Advocates i/by AMR Law
                for Applicant.
               Mr. Sukanta A. Karmakar, APP for Respondent No.1 – State.
               Mr. Ashwin Thool a/w. Mr. Aditya Mehta, Ms. Shivani Garg, Mr.
                Manan Shah and Ms. Poornima Eapen, Advocates i/by Cyril
                Amarchand Mangaldas for Respondent No.2.
                                           ...................

                                          CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                          DATE          : SEPTEMBER 01, 2026
              P.C.:

              1.       Heard Mr. Mundargi, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr.

              Karmakar, learned APP for Respondent No.1 – State and Mr. Thool,

              learned Advocate for Respondent No.2.


              2.       This is a Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the

              Constitution of India, 1950 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya

              Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with C.R.No.53 of 2025

              dated 14.05.2025 registered with EOW, Unit-5, G.C.-3, Mumbai for

              offences punishable under Sections 316(5) and 318(4) of the

              Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 earlier being lodged as FIR bearing

              C.R.No.116 of 2025 with Malabar Hill Police Station.




                                                                                  1 of 7
                                                       81.WP.4368.2026.doc


3.        Petitioner and Respondent No.2 are both real brothers and

they have reconciled and settled their dispute with regarding to the

transactions relationship / investment, etc. The Complainant has filed

Consent Affidavit dated 29.08.2026. I have perused the stated and

what is stated therein has been confirmed by the Complainant who is

present through Video Conferencing. Mr. Shah confirm the averments

made in the Affidavit and consent for quashing the criminal

proceedings.


4.        Mr. Karmakar informs the Court that C-summary report has

been filed. Nevertheless the dispute between the parties has been

resolved amicably.


5.        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

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



                                                                   2 of 7
                                                           81.WP.4368.2026.doc


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.


6.           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.


7.           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
1    1992 AIR 604

                                                                       3 of 7
                                                      81.WP.4368.2026.doc


by “consent quashing”.


8.       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 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.


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



                                                                  4 of 7
                                                          81.WP.4368.2026.doc


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.


10.       Applying the aforesaid principles to the facts of the present

case, I am of the opinion that the Petitioner for his actions resulting in

the complainant invoking criminal proceedings and now both the

parties seeking quashing by consent, the Petitioner/s, Applicant/s

should pay costs. Hence, Petitioner, Applicant is directed to pay costs

of Rs.1,00,000/- towards the Corpus of A.K. Munshi Yojana’s J.T. Sheth

Mandbuddhi Vikas Kendra, a Special School 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

                                                                      5 of 7
                                                                81.WP.4368.2026.doc


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. Petitioner is present in Court and through his learned

Advocate agrees to pay the aforesaid costs amount to the above

charity.


11.        In view of the above matter, the present Petition deserves to

be allowed subject to payment of costs as directed herein above so that

the parties can lead their life without being involved in the present

criminal case. It is so allowed in terms of prayer clauses ‘ a and b’

which read thus:-


           “a.   This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash the F.I.R. bearing
                 C.R.No.53 of 2025 Economic Offences Wing, Mumbai, GC-3 Unit
                 – 5 (originally FIR bearing C.R.No. 116 of 2025 lodged with
                 Malabar Hill Police Station, Mumbai) for offences punishable
                 u/ss. 316 (5) and 318 (4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
                 and proceedings arising out of C.C.No.4462/MISC/2025 pending
                 before the Ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 47 th Court at
                 Esplanade, Mumbai registered against the Petitioner upon such
                 terms and conditions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and
                 proper;
           b.    As a consequence to prayer clause (a) above, this Hon’ble Court
                 may be pleased to direct the demat account of Great White
                 Global Pvt. Ltd. Bearing Account No. 1201060003958029 with
                 Anand Rathi Share and Stock Brokers Limited be defreezed. ”


12.        It is clarified that Demat account of the Company which has

been frozen by the prosecution will be immediately released from any

such attachment and the said account shall stand defreezed forthwith,


                                                                             6 of 7
                                                                                81.WP.4368.2026.doc


                on receipt of a server copy of the order downloaded from the Bombay

                High Court website by the Concerned authorities for the said Demat

                accounts.


                13.                 List the Writ Petition for compliance of the order regarding

                payment of costs on 16th September 2026.


                14.                 Advocate in Petition for Petitioner shall remain present and

                show compliance on behalf of Petitioner on the returnable date for

                compliance. 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 Petitioner/parties to Petition.


                15.                 Writ Petition is allowed and disposed.



H. H. SAWANT                                                      [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
                         Digitally signed
                         by HARSHADA
               HARSHADA HANUMANT
                        SAWANT
               HANUMANT Date:
               SAWANT   2026.09.03
                         18:09:18
                         +0530




                                                                                            7 of 7