Bombay High Court

MOHAMMED JASIM BHATIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Decided: 18 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The High Court quashed and set aside FIR C.R. No. 0456 of 2026, allowing all six writ petitions.

Summary

The Bombay High Court considered six writ petitions filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to quash FIR No. 0456 of 2026 registered at Versova Police Station. The complainant, a member of a co‑operative housing society, alleged collusion between the petitioners and a new developer concerning his own gala premises. The petitioners presented six consent affidavits indicating that the dispute had been settled and they wished to have the criminal proceeding dismissed. The Court rejected an intervenor’s request to join the case, holding that the old developer’s separate civil and arbitration matters could be pursued elsewhere. Relying on the inherent powers under Section 528 (mirroring Section 482 of the CrPC) and the guidelines from State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the Court found no prima facie case and ordered the FIR quashed. All six petitions were allowed and disposed.

Issues considered

Whether the FIR filed under Section 528 BNSS can be quashed on the basis of a settlement and consent affidavits.
Whether the old developer has a right to intervene in the criminal proceeding.
Whether the High Court’s exercise of inherent powers under Section 528 (and Section 482 CrPC) is justified in this circumstance.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528
Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482

Subjects

criminal procedure
quash FIR
Section 528 BNSS
Section 482 CrPC
high court inherent powers
settlement
consent affidavit
intervention

Judgment

91. CRI WP-4532-26.odt

Amberkar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 4532 OF 2026

Mohammed Jasim Bhati .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents

WITH
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 15657 OF 2026

Rajeev Narayandas Bhathija .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents

WITH
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 15658 OF 2026

Samina Rayees Khan .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents

WITH
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 15660 OF 2026

Horace Poorekhorsandi .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents

WITH
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 15666 OF 2026

Abdul Kader Haji Noor Mohammed .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents

WITH
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 17775 OF 2026

Shakeel Ahmed Bhati .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents

1 of 7
91. CRI WP-4532-26.odt

....................
 Mr. Jasim Bhatti / Shakeel, Advocate for Petitioners
 Mr. Govind Javeri a/w Mr. Pradhuman Chauhan
 Mr. Ankit Makhija, Advocate for First Informant
 Mr. Advait Helekar a/w Ms. Anuja Tamble i/by Mr. Adithya R. Iyer,
Advocates for Intervenor
 Mr. Paresh Gargade, PSI (Pairavi Officer), Versova Police Station
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 18, 2026
P. C.:

1. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

2. Present Petitions are filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash the FIR bearing No.

0456 of 2026 registered with Versova Police Station.

3. Complainant is a member of a Co-operative Housing Society

who had an issue with regard to his gala qua redevelopment

undertaken by the said Society.

4. I have heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties at the

bar.

5. Mr. Helekar would persuade the Court to consider his

intervention. He represents the old developer who has been

terminated by the Society. He would submit that by virtue of the FIR

filed by the Complainant qua his own gala in the redevelopment,

2 of 7
91. CRI WP-4532-26.odt

certain substantive rights of the old developer are also attached

thereto and therefore the developer be allowed to intervene and file

an intervention application in the present matter. He would inform the

Court that the old developer is behind bars and therefore he has

received instructions from him to intervene and he needs time to take

instructions from him. He also informs the Court that in the

meanwhile, there have been several civil proceedings between the

parties qua their substantive rights vis-a-vis the old developer which

are pending in this Court as well as arbitration proceedings in civil

proceedings.

6. Insofar as the present Petitioners are concerned, they are

accused by Complainant having colluded with the new developer

appointed by the Society, but his complaint is restricted to his own

gala premises only. In this view of the matter, whatever may be the

substantive rights of the old developer qua the Society who has

terminated his D.A., he is free to agitate the same in any appropriate

proceeding as may be available to him in accordance with law. He has

in fact already filed civil proceedings in this Court and arbitration

proceedings as well. His intervention in the present present Petitions

which the Petitioners and the Complainant are willing to quash by

consent is not maintainable and therefore, the request made by Mr.

Helekar stands outrightly rejected. Needless to state that any right

3 of 7
91. CRI WP-4532-26.odt

that may accrue to the old developer with regard to his relationship

with the Society or the development in question or his D.A. which is

terminated, the same are kept open as available to him in accordance

with law without this Court opining anything on merits of the same

qua the rights of the old developer. His intervention in the criminal

complaint filed by one member of the Society qua his premises is not

maintainable.

7. Six Consent affidavits of Complainant dated 12.09.2026 in

above captioned six Petitions are filed before Court. I have perused

the same. By virtue of what is stated therein, this Court needs to

intervene so that the ignominy of the criminal proceeding qua the

single gala belonging to the Complainant should not be carried

forward since the parties have now reconciled their dispute altogether.

In that view of the matter, I am inclined to allow the Petitions.

8. 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

4 of 7
91. CRI WP-4532-26.odt

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.

9. 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.

10. In view of the above, all six Petitions are allowed in terms of

prayer clauses (a) which read thus:-

1 1992 AIR 604

5 of 7
91. CRI WP-4532-26.odt

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No. 4532 of 2026:-

“a. that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to Issue a Writ of
Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction in the
nature of Certiorari, calling for the records and proceedings in
respect of FIR C.R. No. 0456 of 2026 registered with the Versova
Police Station, Mumbai, and after examining the legality, validity,
and propriety thereof, be pleased to quash and set aside the
same;

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 15657 OF 2026:-

“a. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to Issue a Writ of Certiorari or
any other appropriate writ, order, or direction in the nature of
Certiorari, calling for the records and proceedings in respect of
FIR C.R. No. 0456 of 2026 dated 06.05.2026 (Exhibit-A)
registered with the Versova Police Station, Mumbai, and after
examining the legality, validity, and propriety thereof, be pleased
to quash and set aside the same;

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 15658 OF 2026:-

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 15660 OF 2026:-

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 15666 OF 2026:-

6 of 7
91. CRI WP-4532-26.odt

to quash and set aside the same;

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 17775 OF 2026:-

“a. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to Issue a Writ of Certiorari or
any other appropriate writ, order, or direction in the nature of
Certiorari, calling for the records and proceedings in respect of
FIR C.R. No. 0456 of 2026 registered with the Versova Police
Station, Mumbai, and after examining the legality, validity, and
propriety thereof, be pleased to quash and set aside the same;

11. All six Petitions are allowed and disposed.

Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Digitally signed
by RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
AMBERKAR
MOHAN Date:
AMBERKAR 2026.09.19
16:14:14
+0530

7 of 7

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…