Bombay High Court
ASPI KHATOW AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- ASHWIN D BHOBE
Holding
The High Court quashed the FIR under Section 482 of the CrPC, subject to the payment of costs by both parties.
Summary
The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 0480 dated 15 December 2025 under Articles 226, 227 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the CrPC, alleging that the case stemmed from a private commercial dispute that had been settled by a deed and a payment of Rs 30 lakhs to Respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 2 filed an affidavit confirming receipt of the settlement amount, expressing no objection to the quashment, and undertaking cooperation with the court. The State’s Assistant Public Prosecutor also consented to the quashment but demanded that costs be imposed. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow the High Court to intervene under Section 482 when the proceeding has no useful purpose, the Court held that the criminal prosecution was unnecessary. The Court therefore quashed the FIR, subject to each party depositing Rs 25,000 as costs within two weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR arising from a private commercial dispute can be quashed under Section 482 of the CrPC when the parties have settled the matter.
- Whether the consent of the complainant and the State is sufficient to justify quashment of criminal proceedings.
- Whether the High Court may impose costs as a condition precedent to the quashment.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Constitution of India — s. 226, 227
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 420
Subjects
- quashment
- Section 482 CrPC
- commercial dispute
- settlement deed
- writ petition
- Article 226
- costs
- FIR
Judgment
92-WP-474-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed
GAYATRI by GAYATRI
RAJENDRA
RAJENDRA SHIMPI
SHIMPI Date: 2026.03.16
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
20:11:52 +0530
WRIT PETITION NO. 474 OF 2026
Aspi Khatow And Anr … Petitioners
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents
-----
Mr. Aditya Mishra, Advocate for Petitioners.
Mr. Omkar Dhakal a/w Mr. Shashwat Nehete, Advocates for
Respondent No. 2.
Mr. Tanveer Khan, APP for Respondent - State.
-------
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 9th MARCH, 2026
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr. Aditya Mishra, learned Advocate for the
Petitioners, Mr. Tanveer Khan, learned APP for the State and Mr.
Omkar Dhakal, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
2. This Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 is preferred by the Petitioners for
quashing of the FIR dated 15th December, 2025 bearing No. 0480
Gayatri shimpi 1
92-WP-474-2026.doc
of 2025 registered with Tardeo Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 (hereafter “impugned FIR’’).
3. Petitioners are present in court and are identified by
their advocate Mr. Aditya Mishra. He submits the photocopies of
the Petitioners' Identity Cards, which are taken on record and
marked as ‘X-colly’ for identification.
4. Respondent No. 2 is present in court and is identified
by her advocate Mr. Omkar Dhakal. He submits a photocopy of
Respondent No. 2's identity card, which is taken on record and
marked as ‘X-1’ for identification.
5. Advocate Mr. Omkar Dhakal submits the Affidavit
dated 27th January 2026, affirmed by Respondent No. 2 before
Notary K. S. Singh. It is taken on record and marked as ‘X-2’ for
identification. Respondent No. 2, who is present in the Court,
states that the Affidavit (X-2) was given of his own free will and
without any pressure, force, or coercion from any person. He states
that the contents of Affidavit (X-2) are as per his say. He reiterates
Gayatri shimpi 2
92-WP-474-2026.doc
the contents of the Affidavit (X-2). He specifically refers to
paragraphs D, E, and F of the Affidavit (X-2), which are transcribed
below verbatim.
“D) I state that I have received a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/-
(Rupees Thirty Lakhs Only) from the Applicant towards
full and final settlement of all my claims arising out of the
subject matter of the FIR.
E) I hereby give my No Objection and unconditional
consent for quashing of the aforesaid FIR and ail
proceedings arising therefrom.
F) I state that I shall not oppose the quashing petition filed
by the Applicant and undertake to cooperate with the
Hon'ble Court and Investigating Agency if required.”
6. Mr. Aditya Mishra and Mr. Omkar Dhakal submit that
the subject matter of the impugned FIR was a private commercial
dispute between the Petitioners and Respondent No. 2. They
submit that due to some non-compliance by the Petitioners,
Respondent No. 2 filed a criminal complaint, leading to the
lodging of the impugned FIR. They submit that the Petitioners
have amicably resolved the matter by entering into a settlement
deed, which they have placed on record at pages 62 to 70. They
clarify that under the terms of the settlement executed on 27 th
January, 2026, the Petitioners were required to pay Rs.
Gayatri shimpi 3
92-WP-474-2026.doc
30,00,000/- to Respondent No. 2, and this amount has been paid.
As a result of the settlement and payment, Respondent No. 2 has
no objection to the quashing of the criminal proceedings. They
specifically refer to pages 56 to 60, where the settlement between
the parties is detailed.
7. Mr. Tanveer Khan, learned APP for the State, submits
that the private commercial dispute between the Petitioners and
Respondent No. 2, being settled as stated by the Advocates for the
parties and referred to in the Affidavit (X-2), he has no objection to
the quashing of the criminal proceedings filed by Respondent No.
2. However, he insists on the imposition of costs.
8. Considering the above facts and the submissions of the
learned advocates, since the dispute is essentially of a civil nature
and the private commercial dispute has been amicably settled
between the Petitioners and Respondent No. 2, and given
Respondent No. 2's no objection in his affidavit (X-2 Colly.), no
useful purpose will be served by continuing the criminal
prosecution. Having regard to the pronouncements of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh v/s. The State of Punjab
Gayatri shimpi 4
92-WP-474-2026.doc
and Another1, Narinder Singh and Others v/s. State of Punjab and
Another2 and Parbatbhai Aahir Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinbhai
Karmur and Others Vs. State of Gujarat and Anr.3, there is no
impediment to allow this Criminal Writ Petition.
9. This Criminal Writ Petition is allowed as per the prayer
clause (a), upon payment of costs of Rs. 50,000/- by the
Petitioners and the Respondent No. 2, as a condition precedent.
Accordingly, the impugned FIR No. 0480 dated 15 th December,
2025, registered with Tardeo Police Station, Mumbai, is quashed.
10. Mr. Aditya Mishra, learned Advocate for the Petitioners
and Mr. Omkar Dhakal, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2,
submit that costs shall be paid within two weeks.
11. The Petitioners and Respondent No. 2 shall each
deposit Rs. 25,000/- in the specified accounts within two weeks
from today and submit the compliance affidavit along with proof
of deposit to the Court Registry on or before 30th March, 2026:-
1. (2012)10 Supreme Court Cases 303.
2. (2014)6 Supreme Court Cases 466.
3. (2017) 9 SCC 641.
Gayatri shimpi 5
92-WP-474-2026.doc
The Petitioners shall deposit an amount of Rs.25,000/- in :-
The High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund
at Mumbai
Account No.: 000120110001337
Bank : Bank of India
Branch : Mumbai Main
IFSC Code : BKID0000001
The Respondent No.2 shall deposit an amount of Rs.25,000/- in :-
Deepstambh Foundation, Delhi
Bank Name : ICICI Bank
Account Name : Deepstambh Foundation Delhi
Account Number : 697401700986
Account Type : Savings
IFSC Code : ICIC0006974
MICR Code : 425229003
12. Writ Petition No. 474 of 2026 is disposed.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Gayatri shimpi 6
Checking your session…