Bombay High Court

MANGESH SAHDEO SAHARE AND ORSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Decided: 23 January 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: ASHWIN D BHOBE

Holding

The High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the FIR and charge‑sheet, holding that the consent affidavit and amicable settlement justified dismissal of the criminal proceedings.

Summary

The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quash of FIR No. 338 of 2024 and the charge‑sheet for offences under IPC sections 323, 406, 498‑A, 504, 506 read with section 34. The petitioners and the wife (Respondent No. 2) had resolved their matrimonial dispute and the wife executed a consent affidavit stating she had no objection to the quashing of the criminal proceedings. Both the State and the wife consented that continuing the case would serve no purpose. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow quashing where the complainant withdraws consent and the matter is settled, the Court held there was no impediment to dismiss the proceedings. Consequently, the FIR and the charge‑sheet were quashed and the criminal proceedings closed. The petition was disposed without costs.

Issues considered

What is the scope of Section 482 CrPC and Article 226 in permitting the quash of criminal proceedings on the basis of a consent affidavit and amicable settlement?
Does the existence of pending divorce proceedings under Section 13‑B of the Hindu Marriage Act affect the court's power to quash the FIR and charge‑sheet?

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 13-B
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 323, 34, 406, 498-A, 504, 506

Subjects

quash of criminal proceedings
consent affidavit
amicable settlement
Section 482 CrPC
Article 226
domestic violence
Hindu Marriage Act
marital dispute

Judgment

Gitalaxmi 908-WP-4640-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 4640 OF 2024

Mangesh Sahdeo Sahare And Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra And Anr. ...Respondents
__________

Ms. Nisha Dubey h/f Mr. Uday B. Gavali a/w Mr. Sachin H. Kankal,
learned Advocates for the Petitioners.
All the Petitioner Nos. 1 to 7 appeared through VC.

Mr. Tanveer G. Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent.
Mr. Ameya Lambhate, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
Respondent No. 2 is present in the Court.
PSI Mr. Vitthal Pardhi attached to Vikhroli Police Station is present in the
Court.
__________

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 23rd JANUARY 2026.

P.C. :

1. Heard Ms. Nisha Dubey, learned Advocate for the Petitioners,
Mr. Tanveer Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent and Mr.
Ameya Lambhate, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.

2. At the outset, Ms. Nisha Dubey, learned Advocate for the
Petitioners craves leave to amend the prayer clause of this Petition
to incorporate the details of charge-sheet. Mr. Tanveer Khan,
learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent No. 1 and Mr. Ameya
Lambhate, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2 do not object for
grant of the request made by Ms. Nisha Dubey. Leave to amend is
granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

Page 1 of 4
Gitalaxmi 908-WP-4640-2024.doc

3. This Petition is preferred by the Petitioners under Article 226
of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, for quashing of the First Information
Report bearing C.R. No. 338 of 2024 dated 27.06.2024 registered
with Vikhroli Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable
under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 504 & 506 read with Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the charge-sheet bearing R.C.C.
No. PW/1091/2024 pending before 31 st Court of Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Vikhroli, arising out of the said FIR.

4. Petitioner Nos. 1 to 7 appear through Video Conference. Ms.
Nisha Dubey, learned Advocate for the Petitioners identifies
Petitioners and tenders the photostat copies of their Aadhar Cards
as identity proof. Same are taken on record and marked as “X
Colly.” for identification. Respondent No. 2 is present along with
her Advocate Mr. Ameya Lambhate. Mr. Ameya Lambhate tenders
photostat copy of the Election Card of Respondent No. 2 as identity
proof. Same is taken on record and marked as “X-1” for
identification.

5. Ms. Nisha Dubey and Mr. Ameya Lambhate jointly submit
that Petitioners and Respondent No. 2 have resolved the
matrimonial dispute between Petitioner No. 1 (husband) and
Respondent No. 2 (wife), as such Respondent No. 2 has given her
No Objection for quashing of the criminal proceedings. They
therefore submit that the criminal proceedings against the
Petitioners be quashed.

6. Mr. Ameya Lambhate states that the Consent Affidavit dated

Page 2 of 4
Gitalaxmi 908-WP-4640-2024.doc

06.08.2025 affirmed by Respondent No. 2 before the Notary
Advocate Ms. Chitra Gaikwad, Vikhroli (E), Mumbai along with the
Consent Terms dated 04.07.2025, are filed along with the present
Petition. Same are taken on record and marked as “X-2 Colly.” for
identification. Respondent No. 2, who is present in the Court, states
that she has filed the said Affidavit out of her own free will and
without any pressure, force or coercion from any person. She
states that the contents of Consent Affidavit dated 06.08.2025 are
as per her say. She reiterates that the dispute between Petitioner
No. 1 and his family is resolved. She states that proceedings for
dissolution of marriage by mutual consent under Section 13-B of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are pending before the Family Court
at Bandra. Reference of the same is made in paragraph no. 5 of the
Consent Affidavit (X-2 Colly.)

7. Petitioners, who are appearing through Video Conference and
Respondent No. 2 reiterate that the dispute between them is
amicably settled. Respondent No. 2 states that she does not intend
to pursue/prosecute the criminal proceedings, as such she has
given her No Objection for quashing of the criminal proceedings.

8. Mr. Tanveer Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent
submits that in view of the statements made by Respondent No. 2
before this Court and her statements in the Consent Affidavit dated
06.08.2025 (X-2 Colly.), no purpose would be served by continuing
with the criminal proceedings. He therefore submits that the
impugned FIR and the charge-sheet be quashed.

9. Having regards to the facts as placed before me, the nature of

Page 3 of 4
Gitalaxmi 908-WP-4640-2024.doc

dispute, the amicable settlement arrived between the parties, the
statements made in Consent Terms dated 04.07.2025 & the
statement made on oath by Respondent No. 2 (Consent Affidavit
dated 06.08.2025-X-2 Colly.) and having regards to the judicial
pronouncements by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of
Gian Singh v/s. The State of Punjab and Another 1, Narinder Singh
and Others v/s. State of Punjab and Another 2 and Parbatbhai Aahir
Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinbhai Karmur and Others Vs. State of
Gujarat and Anr.3, there is no impediment to allow this Petition and
to quash the criminal proceedings.

10. In view of the above, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer
clause (a). Consequently, FIR bearing C.R. No. 338 of 2024 dated
27.06.2024 registered with Vikhroli Police Station, Mumbai for the
offence punishable under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 504 & 506
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the
subsequent charge-sheet bearing R.C.C. No. PW/1091/2024
pending before 31st Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Vikhroli, arising out of the said FIR, are quashed. Criminal
proceedings against the Petitioners arising out of the said FIR and
the charge-sheet are closed.

11. Criminal Writ Petition No. 4640 of 2024 is disposed of. No
order as to costs.

[ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.]
GITALAXMI
KRISHNA
1. (2012)10 Supreme Court Cases 303. KOTAWADEKAR
2. (2014)6 Supreme Court Cases 466.
3 (2017) 9 SCC 641. Digitally signed by
Page 4 of 4 GITALAXMI KRISHNA
KOTAWADEKAR
Date: 2026.02.09
19:55:12 +0530

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…