GURSHARANJOT SINGH RANDHAWA @ GURU RANDHAWAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

                                                                    96. CRI WP-4626-26.odt


Amberkar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                              WRIT PETITION NO. 4626 OF 2026

           Gursharanjot Singh Randhawa
           @ Guru Randhawa                                  .. Petitioner
                      Versus
           The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                  .. Respondents
                                       ....................
            Mr. Ameya Lambhate, Advocate for Petitioner
            Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for State
            Mr. Dashang Doshi i/by Dewani Associates, Advocates for
             Respondent No. 2
                                            ...................
                                         CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                         DATE            : SEPTEMBER 18, 2026
           P. C.:

           1.       Heard Mr. Lambhate, learned Advocate for Petitioner and Ms.

           Talhar, learned APP for State.

           2.       Present Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya

           Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing and setting aside of

           the FIRs and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

           3.       The lis between the parties was on account of the Complaint

           filed under the provisions of Sections 296 and 353 of the Bharatiya

           Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Section 67 of the Information Technology Act,

           2000 and Section 6 of the Indecent Representation of Women

           (Prohibition) Act, 1986 registered with Nodal Cyer Police Station,

           Maharashtra Cyber, Mumbai.


                                                                                    1 of 4
                                                       96. CRI WP-4626-26.odt


4.    It is prima facie seen that there was a disclaimer to the

contentious video which was uploaded on the YouTube channel. The

parties have now reconciled their lis.         Consent affidavit dated

07.09.2026 filed by Respondent No. 2 - Complainant is taken on

record.   The Complainant on his own volition has agreed to seek

quashing of the criminal proceedings without any favor on his own

accord. Complainant is present through VC. I have interacted with

him. He confirms the contents of the said affidavit. In that view of the

matter, I am inclined to allow the present Petition.

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

natural justice. The exercise of such powers under Section 482 of CrPC




                                                                       2 of 4
                                                              96. CRI WP-4626-26.odt


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 view of the above matter, the present Petition is allowed in

terms of prayer clauses (a) & (b) which reads thus:-

             “a)    This Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside FIR No. 70
                    of 2026 dated 11.08.2026 registered with Nodal Cyber Police
                    Station, Maharashtra Cyber, Mumbai, for offences punishable
                    under Sections 296 and 353 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
                    2023, Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and
                    Section 6 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition)
                    Act, 1986;
             b)     That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to consequently quash and set
                    aside all further proceedings, investigation, if any, and/or
                    criminal proceedings arising out of the said FIR/Crime No. 70 of
                    2026, dated 11.08.2026 registered with Nodal Cyber Police
                    Station, Maharashtra Cyber, Mumbai, insofar as the same concern
                    the Petitioner;"

1    1992 AIR 604

                                                                              3 of 4
                                                                  96. CRI WP-4626-26.odt


           8.         Petition is allowed and disposed.



Amberkar                                             [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

                       Digitally signed
                       by RAVINDRA
            RAVINDRA MOHAN
                     AMBERKAR
            MOHAN    Date:
            AMBERKAR 2026.09.19
                       16:21:54
                       +0530




                                                                                  4 of 4