Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

RAKESH SHIVNATH PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The petition is allowed; the FIR and charge‑sheet are quashed and the pending criminal proceedings are stayed.

Summary

The petitioner and the second respondent reconciled a monetary dispute of Rs. 4.5 lakhs, with part of the amount already paid and the balance to be paid in tranches. A consent affidavit was filed, and the petitioner sought quashing of FIR No. 0064 of 2025, registered under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with a stay of the related criminal proceedings. The Court examined its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, and the guidelines laid down in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal. Relying on the settlement and the absence of any prima facie case, the Court held that the FIR and the pending charge‑sheet could be quashed and the proceedings stayed. The petition was allowed and disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the FIR registered under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 can be quashed on the basis of a settlement and consent affidavit.
  • Whether the High Court may exercise its inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS (and Section 482 CrPC) to stay and set aside criminal proceedings in a case involving alleged non‑compoundable offences.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • quashment of FIR
  • Section 528 BNSS
  • Section 482 CrPC
  • settlement and consent affidavit
  • criminal procedure
  • non‑compoundable offences
  • abuse of process

Judgment

                                                                     90. CRI WP-4531-26.odt


Amberkar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                               WRIT PETITION NO. 4531 OF 2026

           Rakesh Shivnath Patil                            .. Petitioner
                      Versus
           The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                  .. Respondents
                                       ....................
            Mr. Jinesh J. Koli a/w Mr. Himanshu J. Patil, Advocates for
             Petitioner
            Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for State
            Ms. Deepti Panadi, Advocate for Respondent No. 2
            Mr. Yuvraj Khairnar, PSI, Colaba Police Station
                                           ...................
                                          CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                          DATE          : SEPTEMBER 18, 2026
           P. C.:

           1.       Heard Mr. Koli, learned Advocate for Petitioner; Ms. Talhar,

           learned APP for State and Ms. Panadi, learned Advocate for

           Respondent No. 2.


           2.       Parties have reconciled their dispute with regard to exchange of

           amount of Rs. 4.5 Lakhs (approximately). Part of the amount of Rs. 2

           Lakhs has already been received by the Complainant. Balance amount

           will be received by the Complainant in separate tranches as agreed by

           the parties. Consent affidavit dated 11.09.2026 filed by Respondent

           No. 2 is taken on record. Parties are before the Court. I have interacted

           with the parties. In view of the request made by the parties for consent

           quashing, I am inclined to allow the present Petition.


                                                                                     1 of 3
                                                     90. CRI WP-4531-26.odt


3.       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

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.


4.       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


1    1992 AIR 604

                                                                     2 of 3
                                                                                   90. CRI WP-4531-26.odt


           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.


           5.          In view of the above, the present Petition is allowed in terms of

           prayer clauses (a) & (b) which read thus:-

                                 “a.     quash and set aside F.I.R. No. 0064 of 2025 dated 04.03.2025
                                         registered with Colaba Police Station, Mumbai, for the offences
                                         punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya
                                         Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, together with the Chargesheet filed
                                         pursuant thereto and bearing PW/852/2025 pending before the
                                         Ld. Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, 08th Court, Esplanade,
                                         Mumbai, along with all consequential proceedings arising
                                         therefrom, by invoking the extraordinary and discretionary
                                         jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court under Article 226 of the
                                         Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya
                                         Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023;
                                 b       Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Writ
                                         Petition, stay the proceedings in proceedings in Police Case No.
                                         PW/852/2025 pending before the Ld. Addl. Chief Judicial
                                         Magistrate (JMFC), 08th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai, on such
                                         terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
                                         proper.

           6.          Petition is allowed and disposed.



Amberkar                                                          [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
                      Digitally signed
                      by RAVINDRA
           RAVINDRA MOHAN
                    AMBERKAR
           MOHAN    Date:
           AMBERKAR 2026.09.19
                      13:57:43
                      +0530




                                                                                                   3 of 3


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.