Sahil Mangesh Dhaware @ Brava and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC6 May 2025WP/1583/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Consensual quashing of FIR; Bombay High Court Writ Petition No.1583 of 2025 under Article 226, Constitution of India read with S.528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; F.I.R. No.48/2025, Charkop Police Station, registered 24-01-2025 under BNS 2023 Ss.3(5), 118(1), 118(2), 138, 351(3), 353; complainant (respondent no.3) no-objection affidavit dated 30-09-2025 marked "X"; amicable resolution between parties; abuse of process of law; complainant no longer supports complaint; petition allowed, FIR quashed qua petitioners; bench: Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar with Gautam A. Ankhad, J.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of F.I.R. No. 48 of 2025 registered with Charkop Police Station on 24 January 2025, granted in terms of prayer clause (b), qua the petitioners. ¶¶23

Sahil Mangesh Dhaware @ Brava and Ors. vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of F.I.R. No. 48 of 2025 registered with Charkop Police Station on 24 January 2025, granted in terms of prayer clause (b), qua the petitioners.

¶¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether F.I.R. No. 48 of 2025 registered with Charkop Police Station against the petitioners, and proceedings arising therefrom, should be quashed by consent in view of the amicable resolution between the parties and the complainant's no objection.

¶¶15

Court's answer

It is settled law that the Court is empowered to quash criminal proceedings to prevent the abuse of process of law, particularly when the complainant no longer supports the complaint, and continuation of such proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose.

¶¶22

Ratio / Principle

Writ Petition No.1583 of 2025 is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b); accordingly, F.I.R. No. 48 of 2025 registered with Charkop Police Station is quashed qua the petitioners.

¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay (judgment delivered per Gautam A. Ankhad, J.; bench comprised Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Gautam A. Ankhad, J.) allowed Writ Petition No.1583 of 2025, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the petitioners sought quashing by consent of F.I.R. No. 48 of 2025 registered with Charkop Police Station on 24 January 2025 under sections 3(5), 118(1), 118(2), 138, 351(3) and 353 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The FIR was registered at the instance of respondent no.3 (original complainant) against petitioners Sahil Mangesh Dhaware @ Bravo, Sumit Vishwanath Poojari and Prithvi Vishwanath Poojari and pertained to misunderstandings that were subsequently amicably resolved; respondent no.3 filed a no-objection affidavit dated 30 September 2025, taken on record and marked "X". Held: it is settled law that the Court is empowered to quash criminal proceedings to prevent the abuse of process of law, particularly when the complainant no longer supports the complaint, and continuation would serve no fruitful purpose. Disposition: petition allowed in terms of prayer clause (b); FIR No.48 of 2025 quashed qua the petitioners.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO.1583 OF 2025

¶3

Sahil Mangesh Dhaware @ Bravo ] 2. Sumit Vishwanath Poojari ]

¶4

Prithvi Vishwanath Poojari ].. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ] 2. Senior Inspector of Police, ] Charkop Police Station ]

¶5

Ashmit Madhur Waghela ].. Respondents

¶6

Ms. Neha Patil with Mr. Ganesh Chavan, Advocates for the Petitioners.

¶7

Mr. Sahil Mangesh Dhaware @ Bravo - Petitioner No.1 is present in Court.

¶8

Mr. Sumit Vishwanath Poojari – Petitioner No.2 is present in Court.

¶9

Mr. Prithvi Vishwanath Poojari – Petitioner No.3 is present in Court.

¶10

Ms. G. P. Mulekar, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1.

¶11

Mr. Subhash Pagare with Mr. Sharmeen Thaisildar and Mr. Sandeep Gupta, Advocates for Respondent No.3. Mr. Ashmit Madhur Waghela – Respondent No.3 is present in Court.

¶12

CORAM : SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ. & GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.

¶13

DATE : 1^ST OCTOBER 2025.

¶14

Per, Gautam A. Ankhad, J.

¶15

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing, by consent, of the F.I.R. No. 48 of 2025 registered with the Charkop Police Station under

1/2

WP-1583-2025.doc

Dixit

sections 3(5), 118(1), 118(2), 138, 351(3) and 353 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶20

The FIR was registered at the instance of the respondent no.3 (the original complainant) against the petitioners. The FIR pertained to certain misunderstandings between the petitioners and the respondent no.3. Subsequently, the differences and misunderstanding between the petitioners and the respondent no.3 has been amicably resolved.

¶21

The respondent no.3 has filed an affidavit dated 30^th September 2025 recording his no objection to the quashing of the FIR and any proceedings arising therefrom. The same is taken on record and marked as “X” for identification. Mr. Sharmeen Thaisildar, the learned counsel for the Respondent No.3 reiterates his client’s no objection to the quashing of FIR.

¶22

It is settled law that the Court is empowered to quash the criminal proceedings to prevent the abuse of process of law, particularly, when the complainant no longer supports the complaint. Therefore, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose. In view of the above, Writ Petition No.1583 of 2025 is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b), which reads as under:-

¶23

“(b) By exercising powers under section 528 of CRPC, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash the FIR bearing No.48 of 2025 registered on 24^th January, 2025 with Charkop Police Station under sections 118(1), 18(2), 138, 3(5), 351(3), 352 BNS, 2023 qua the Petitioner;”

¶24

[ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ] [ CHIEF JUSTICE ]

¶25

Digitally signed by SNEHA SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT ABHAY Date: WP-1583-2025.doc DIXIT 2025.10.07 12:20:15 +0530

¶26

2/2

¶27

Dixit

Sahil Mangesh Dhaware @ Brava and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahil Mangesh Dhaware @ Brava and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Maheshkumar G. Garodia vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Department

Jai Vijay Gulabani and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ashok Lalchand Goyal vs The State of Maharashtra

Salil Deshpande vs Shalaka Deshpande and Anr.

Mamta Chandrasen Chauhan and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rhoda Cognax Private Limited through Its Director and Authorized Officer vs the Regional Director Estate Office