Rehan Aziz Shaikh and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rehan Aziz Shaikh and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause 6.1, i.e., the quashing sought under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. of C.C. No. 5002/PW/2023 arising out of C.R. No. 1803 of 2022, with the consent of Respondent No.2, the informant.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 5002/PW/2023 (arising out of C.R. No. 1803 of 2022, Malvani Police Station) against the Petitioners — Husband, Father-in-law, Mother-in-law and Brother-in-law of Respondent No.2 — should be quashed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., with the consent of Respondent No.2, the informant.

Court's answer

In view of the affidavit dated 30th July 2025 of Respondent No.2 (informant) affirming her no objection, her Consent Terms dated 3rd September 2024 in C.C. No. 309/DV/2023 (paragraph 6 no-objection), and her personal reiteration of the no-objection in Court, this Court allowed the Petition in terms of prayer clause 6.1, thereby granting the quashing relief sought under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. (Joint order of both Judges; no separate opinion.)

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Coram: A. S. Gadkari and Rajesh S. Patil, JJ.; decided 06-08-2025) allowed Criminal Writ Petition No. 2069 of 2024, filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the informant (Respondent No.2) for quashing of C.C. No. 5002/PW/2023, pending before the Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, 24th Court, Borivali at Mumbai, arising out of C.R. No. 1803 of 2022 dated 20th December 2022 registered with Malvani Police Station, Mumbai, under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 504 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Basis of quashing: Respondent No.2's affidavit dated 30th July 2025 (affirmed before Notary Public) giving her no objection, her Consent Terms dated 3rd September 2024 filed with Petitioner No.1 in C.C. No. 309/DV/2023 before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 24th Court, Borivali (paragraph 6 containing the no objection), and her personal presence in Court reiterating the no objection. The Petition was allowed in terms of prayer clause 6.1. No precedents were cited; no dissent.

bipin prithiani 9-wp-2069.24.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2069 OF 2024

Rehan Aziz Shaikh & Ors. … Petitioners

V/s.

Digitally signed BIPINDHARMENDER by BIPINDHARMENDERPRITHIANI PRITHIANI Date: 2025.08.18 15:43:03 +0530

State of Maharashtra & Anr.

… Respondents

Mr. Sagar Batavia i/by Mr. Anees Shaikh for Petitioners. Mr. Ashish I. Satpute, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Ajaykumar Sahani for Respondent No.2. Mr. Ganesh Shivarkar, PSI, Malvani Police Station, Mumbai.

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ. DATE : 6^th AUGUST 2025

P.C.:-

Petitioners i.e. Husband, Father in law, Mother in law and Brother in law of Respondent No.2 have filed this Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of C.C. No. 5002/PW/2023, pending on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, 24^th Court, Borivali at Mumbai, arising out of C.R. No. 1803 of 2022 dated 20^th December 2022, registered with Malvani Police Station, Mumbai, under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 504 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, with the consent of Respondent No.2, the informant.

1/2

bipin prithiani 9-wp-2069.24.doc

Advocate Mr. Sahani appearing for Respondent No.2, tendered across the Bar her affidavit dated 30^th July 2025, duly affirmed before the Notary Public. It is stated therein that, Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.2 have filed Consent Terms dated 3^rd September 2024 in C.C. No. 309/DV/2023 in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 24^th Court, Borivali at Mumbai. In paragraph 6 thereof, Respondent No.2 has given her no objection for quashing of the said crime.

2.1) Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court and through her Advocate, reiterates the contents of her affidavit dated 30^th July 2025 and her ‘no objection’ for quashing of the crime in question.

In view thereof, the Petition is allowed in terms of prayer

clause 6.1.

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

2/2