Bombay High Court

DINESH SHANKAR RAO KUNDAN AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

Decided: 17 June 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE

Holding

The Court held that the petitioners have a substantive alternate remedy of filing a discharge application before the trial court, rendering the writ petition unnecessary.

Summary

The petitioners filed a criminal writ petition seeking to quash FIR No. C.R. No.7 of 2018 registered at Vishrambaug Police Station for alleged offences under IPC sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 472 read with 34, alleging diversion of funds with K.K. Enterprises. The respondents contended that the charge‑sheet had already been filed on 3 April 2024. The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s observation in Iqbal @ Bala v. State of U.P. (2023 SCC 209) that a substantive alternate remedy exists in the form of an application for discharge before the trial court. Consequently, the Court held that the writ petition was not the appropriate forum for relief. The petition was disposed, reserving liberty for the petitioners to pursue the alternate remedy of filing a discharge application.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal writ petition seeking to quash an FIR is maintainable when an alternate remedy of filing a discharge application before the trial court exists
Whether the observations of the Supreme Court in Iqbal @ Bala (2023 SCC 209) are applicable to the present petition

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 472

Subjects

quash FIR
criminal writ petition
alternate remedy
discharge application
IPC offences
High Court of Bombay

Judgment

                      SKN                                                         17-WP-5626.18.doc

                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                   CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 5626 OF 2018

                      Dinesh Shankar Rao Kundan and others.                     … Petitioners.
                              Vs.
                      The State of Maharashtra and another.                      ... Respondents.

                                          _______________________________

                      Mr.Rahul S. Kate for the Petitioners.
                      Mr.Yogesh Dabke, APP for the Respondent-State.
                      Mr.Sagar Kothari i/b. Legasis Partners.
                      Mr.Chetan More, API, EOW, Pune City is present.
                                          _______________________________
SANJAY
KASHINATH
NANOSKAR                                 CORAM        : RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE , J.
Digitally signed by
SANJAY KASHINATH
NANOSKAR                                 DATED        : 17th JUNE 2026.
Date: 2026.06.18
15:44:33 +0530



                      P. C. :-

                      1.         By this petition, the Petitioners seek to quash FIR bearing

                      C.R.No.7 of 2018 dated 10th January 2018 registered with Vishrambaug

                      Police Station, district- Thane for the offences punishable under sections

                      406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 472 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is

                      the contention of Respondent No.2 that the Petitioners had diverted certain

                      amounts with the aid and assistance of the entity known as

                      K.K.Enterprises.

                      2.         Learned A.P.P., on instructions from Mr.More, API, EOW, Pune

                      City, submits that, after completion of investigation of present crime police


                                                                                           1/2
SKN                                                         17-WP-5626.18.doc

have already filed charge-sheet on 3rd April 2024.

3.        In view of the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

in paragraph No.7 in the case of Iqbal @ Bala and others v. State of U.P.

and others reported in (2023) 20 SCC 209, Petitioners are having

substantive alternate remedy by way of filing an application for discharge

before the trial Court.

4.        Petition is accordingly disposed of by reserving the said liberty in

favour of the Petitioners.



                                (RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.)




                                                                      2/2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…