Bombay High Court
SANDEEP VINOD TANNAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petition is allowed and FIR No. 19/2026 is quashed by mutual consent of the parties.
Summary
The petition, filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), sought to quash FIR No. 19/2026 registered against the petitioner, a son, on allegations under sections 118(2), 333 and 115(2) of the BNSS. The mother and son had resolved their dispute and both appeared before the court, requesting a mutual consent quash. The court, after hearing counsel, warned the son against any future harassment of his mother and directed the local police to send a lady officer monthly for a year to monitor any complaints. Accepting the parties' consent, the court allowed the petition and ordered the FIR to be quashed. The petition was consequently disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether FIR No. 19/2026 filed under sections 118(2), 333 and 115(2) of the BNSS can be quashed by mutual consent of the parties under Section 528 of the BNSS.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 118(2), 333
Subjects
- quash FIR
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 528
- mutual consent
- domestic harassment
- police monitoring
Judgment
36. CRI WP 4821-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 4821 OF 2026
Sandeep Vinod Tanna .. Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
....................
Mr. Akhilesh Upadhyay, Advocate for Petitioner
Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for State
Mr. Saurabh Tiwari, Advocate for Respondent No. 2
PSI Sonawane, Pairavi Officer, Kandivali Police Station
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 22, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Upadhyay, learned Advocate for Petitioner; Ms.
Talhar, learned APP for State and Mr. Tiwari, learned Advocate for
Respondent No. 2.
2. Present Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) seeking to quash FIR No.
19/2026 registered with Kandivali Police Station.
3. The dispute between the parties before the Court who are
mother and son stands resolved. Without delineating the dispute at
the request made by the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, it
would be worthwhile if the present proceedings are quashed since the
1 of 3
36. CRI WP 4821-26.odt
son and the mother both are before the Court and the mother has
persuaded the Court to allow the present Petition by consent quashing.
4. I have interacted with the Petitioner son and warned him that
henceforth, if any such dereliction of physical harm to his mother
happens on his part, he will have to be dealt with strictly and sternly.
In that view of the matter, I pass a direction to the local jurisdictional
Police Station where the mother/complainant and her son are residing
in the same building to depute a lady police officer to visit the mother
on the first Sunday of every month for a period of one year and
inquire with the mother who is the complainant about whether she is
facing any harassment or trouble from the Petitioner-son herein. They
both reside in the same building but on different floors as informed to
me. If the Complainant complains about any harassment meted out to
her by her son after passing of this order, the police is directed to
record an appropriate complaint and take immediate action against
the Petitioner-son.
5. In view of the above and along with the above directions and at
the request made by the learned Advocates appearing for the parties
who are present in Court, the Petition stands allowed in terms of
prayer clause (a), which reads thus:-
"a. The Hon'ble court be pleased to called paper and proceeding of FIR
No 19/2026 registered in Kandivali Police station against petitioner
on report of respondent no 2 original informer, U/S 118 (2), 333,
2 of 3
36. CRI WP 4821-26.odt
115 (2) of BNS and verify the correctness be pleased to quash FIR
No 19/2026 against petitioner U/S 118 (2), 333, 115 (2) of BNS
and or quash by mutual consent of petitioner and respondent no 2."
6. Petition is allowed and disposed.
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
AMBERKAR
MOHAN Date:
AMBERKAR 2026.09.23
10:51:01
+0530
3 of 3
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.