Bombay High Court
AKSHAY DILIP SHIRKE AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- ASHWIN D BHOBE
Holding
The Court held that where the complainant voluntarily consents and the dispute is settled, the criminal proceedings may be quashed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Summary
The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 74 of 2021 filed under Sections 323, 498A and 504 read with Section 34 IPC, arising from a matrimonial dispute. The complainant, Respondent No.2, filed an affidavit stating that the marriage had been dissolved by mutual consent and that she withdrew all allegations, including the domestic violence case and the 498A case, and had no objection to the FIR being set aside. Both parties submitted that the dispute was amicably resolved and that continuing the criminal prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Relying on the Supreme Court’s pronouncements in Gian Singh, Narinder Singh and Parbatbhai cases, the Court held that there was no impediment to quash the FIR under Section 482 of the CrPC when the complainant consents. Consequently, the petition was allowed, the FIR and charge‑sheet were quashed, and the parties were ordered to deposit costs of Rs. 50,000.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC when the complainant consents and the underlying dispute is settled.
- Whether quashing the FIR would be contrary to public interest or the statutory duty of the State.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. Section 528
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. Section 482
- Constitution of India — s. Article 226
- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. Section 13(B)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. Section 323, Section 34, Section 498A, Section 504
Subjects
- quash FIR
- Section 482 CrPC
- matrimonial dispute
- consent of complainant
- domestic violence
- Section 498A
- criminal proceedings settlement
- costs
Judgment
9-WP-891-2026.doc
Digitally signed
GAYATRI
by GAYATRI
RAJENDRA
RAJENDRA SHIMPI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SHIMPI Date:
2026.03.09
20:11:53 +0530
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 891 OF 2026
Akshay Dilip Shirke & Ors. … Petitioners
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents
-----
Mr. Shrijeet Raorane, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. Kiran Mohite a/w Ms. Deepika Mule & Kartik Malusare,
Advocates for Respondent No. 2.
Mr. Prasanna Malshe, APP for Respondent – State.
Mr. A. R. Kumbhr – API, Manpada Police Station, Thane City.
-------
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 4th MARCH, 2026
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr. Shrijeet Raorane, learned Advocate for the
Petitioners, Mr. Prasanna Malshe, learned APP for the Respondent
– State and Mr. Kiran Mohite, learned Advocate for Respondent
No. 2.
2. This Petition, filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code,
1973, and Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
Gayatri shimpi 1
9-WP-891-2026.doc
2023, is by the Petitioners seeking to quash the FIR bearing No. 74
of 2021, dated 15th February 2021 (impugned FIR), registered with
Manapada Police Station, Thane, for offences punishable under
Sections 323, 498A, and 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860.
3. Petitioners are present in court and are identified by
their advocate Mr. Shrijeet Raorane. He submits photocopies of the
four identity cards of the Petitioners, which are taken on record
and marked as ‘X’ for identification.
4. Respondent No. 2 is present in court and is identified
by her Advocate, Mr. Kiran Mohite. He submits the photocopy of
Respondent No. 2's Identity Card, which is taken on record and
marked as ‘X-1’ for identification.
5. Mr. Kiran Mohite tenders the Affidavit dated 17th
January, 2026 affirmed by Respondent No. 2 before Notary Shane
Cardoz same is taken on record and marked as ‘X-2’ for
identification. Respondent No. 2 states that the said Affidavit (X-2)
is filed out of her own free will and without any pressure or
Gayatri shimpi 2
9-WP-891-2026.doc
coercion from any person. She states that the contents of the
Affidavit (X-2) are as per her say. She reiterates her no objection
for quashing of the criminal proceedings. Paragraph Nos. 2 to 6 of
the affidavit ‘X-2’ are transcribed herein verbatim:-
“2. I say that we have filed Divorce Petition bearing
Petition No. A -1902 of 2024 before the Hon'ble Family
Court at Mumbai to pass a decree declaring the marriage
dated 14th May 2015, solemnized between me and
Petitioner No. 1 be dissolved by the Order the Decree of
Divorce by Mutual Consent u/s 13(B) of Hindu Marriage
Act 1955. I say that I and Petitioner No. 1 got divorce by
mutual consent on 2nd December 2024 and now living our
respective life peacefully without interference of each
other.
3. I say that in lieu of the Consent terms dated 2 nd
December 2024, I have agreed to withdraw all allegations,
statements and complaints filed against the Petitioner and
his family members, accordingly I have withdrawn the
Domestic Violence Case being PWDVA Case No. 13 of 2021
pending before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Chiplun,
on 19th August 2024.
4. I say that I have also given consent to compound the
offense in 498A case in lieu of Consent Terms dated 2 nd
December 2024. I say that I hereby give my Consent and
statement that I do not want to proceed with 498A case
bearing RCC Case No. 514 of 2021 pending before the
Learned Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division), Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Kalyan and like to withdraw the
allegations and further I have no objection, if FIR bearing
C. R. No. 74 of 2021 registered with Manpada Police
Station on 15th February 2021 under section 323, 498-A
and 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 (IPC) be quash and set aside by this Hon'ble Court in
the interest of justice to live our respective life peacefully
without any disputes. I say that as per Consent Terms dated
2nd December 2024, I have agreed to co-operate with
Petitioner to quash and/or dispose the case filed by me,
before the Learned Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division),
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kalyan under section 498A
of IPC. I say that I have no objection, if the aforesaid FIR
dated 15th February 2021 quash and set aside by this
Hon'ble Court.
Gayatri shimpi 3
9-WP-891-2026.doc
5. I say that there is no coercion and/or pressure upon
me for withdrawal and/or giving consent for quashing the
FIR dated 15th February 2021 filed against Petitioners. I say
that I am giving present consent and no objection without
any pressure and my own will and in compliance of the
Consent Term dated 2nd December 2024 filed with Family
Court in Divorce Petition bearing Petition No. A 1902 of
2024 and further to live remaining life peacefully after
getting divorce from the Petitioner No. 1.
6. I say that as per Consent terms dated 2nd December
2024, all compliances has been done and only quashing of
FIR is pending”.
6. Mr. Shrijeet Raorane and Mr. Kiran Mohite submit that
the matrimonial dispute between Petitioner No. 1 (Husband) and
Respondent No. 2 (Wife) led to Respondent No. 2 filing a
complaint, which was registered as the impugned FIR. They state
that Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 have amicably resolved
their matrimonial issues. They further submit that Petitioner No. 1
and Respondent No. 2 have decided to part ways and have
obtained a divorce. To clarify, they mention that the divorce
petition, bearing Petition No. A-1902 of 2024, filed before the
Court at Mumbai, was decreed on 2nd December 2024. They also
state that, in light of this resolution, Respondent No. 2 has no
objection to the quashing of the criminal proceedings against the
Petitioners. They refer to and rely on the statements made by
Respondent No. 2 in her Affidavit (X-2). Additionally, they mention
that Respondent No. 2 has withdrawn the Domestic Violence
Gayatri shimpi 4
9-WP-891-2026.doc
proceedings, bearing PWDVA Case No. 13 of 2021.
7. Mr. Prasanna Malshe, learned APP for Respondent No.
1 – State, submits that as the matrimonial dispute between
Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 is resolved, and in view of
the statements made by Respondent No. 2 in her affidavit ‘X-2’, he
has no objection to the quashing of the criminal proceedings.
However, he insists on imposing costs.
8. Mr. Shrijeet Raorane and Mr. Kiran Mohite, on
instructions from the Petitioners and the Respondent No.2, state
that appropriate cost shall be paid.
9. Considering the aforementioned circumstances and
submissions of the learned Advocates, the nature of the dispute,
the fact that the matter has been settled between the Petitioners
and Respondent No. 2, and the statement of Respondent No. 2 in
her Affidavit (X-2), 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. State of
Punjab, Narinder Singh and Ors v. State of Punjab and Anr, and
Gayatri shimpi 5
9-WP-891-2026.doc
Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai v. The State of Gujarat, there is no
impediment to granting this Petition.
10. In view of the above, Criminal Writ Petition No. 891 of
2026 is allowed in terms of the prayer clause (a), subject to the
payment of costs of Rs. 50,000/- as a condition precedent.
Consequently, the impugned FIR and the charge-sheet arising out
of the impugned FIR are quashed.
11. The Petitioners shall jointly deposit costs of Rs.
25,000/- and Respondent No. 2 shall deposit costs of Rs. 25,000/-
in the below-mentioned Account within a period of two weeks
from today and file in the Registry of this Court the compliance
affidavit along with the proof of deposit on or before 23 rd March,
2026.
Deepstambh Foundation, Delhi
Bank Name : ICICI Bank
Account Name : Deepstambh Foundation Delhi
Account Number : 697401700986
Account Type : Savings
IFSC Code : ICIC0006974
MICR Code : 425229003
Gayatri shimpi 6
9-WP-891-2026.doc
12. This Criminal Writ Petition No. 891 of 2026 is allowed
in the above-said terms.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Gayatri shimpi 7
Checking your session…