Haresh Madhukar Dhanavade vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

¶1

dtg 17-Wp-2202-2025.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2202 OF 2025

¶5

	Haresh Madhukar Dhanavade	]
	Age:- 37 years, Occ.:- Service,	]
	Residing at: B/3, Flat No. 203,	]
	Chandresh Hills, Babul Pada,	]
	BMC Colony, MD Nagar,	]
	Nalasopara East, Palghar	]	… Petitioner
	V/s.
1.	State of Maharashtra	]
	Through Achole Police Station,	]
	Nalasopara East, District – Palghar	]
2.	Vikas Sawata Waghmare	]
	Age:- 51 years, Occ.:- Service,	]
	Residing at: Flat No. 204, B/10,	]
	Chandresh Hills, Babul Pada,	]
	BMC Colony, MD Nagar,	]
	Nalasopara East, District – Palghar	]	… Respondents

¶6

Mr. Abhinesh Yadav for Petitioner. Mr. Vinod Chate, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. D.K. Shukla a/w Mr. Ashutosh Singh for Respondent No.2. Mr. Vijay S. Kumbhar, ASI, Achole Police Station, present.

¶7

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ. DATE : 11^th July 2025.

¶8

1/4

¶9

dtg 17-Wp-2202-2025.doc

¶10

P. C. :

¶11

Petitioner, accused in R.C.C. No. 1250 of 2025, pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Vasai, arising out of C.R.No. 0207 of 2024, dated 16^th May 2024, registered with Achole Police Station, Mira-Bhayandar, Vasai-Virar, Police Commissionerate, District Palghar, punishable under Sections 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, has invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for quashing of the said case with the consent of Respondent No.2, the informant.

¶12

Heard, Mr. Yadav, learned Advocate for Petitioner, Mr. Chate, learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and Mr. Shukla, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2. Perused entire record produced before us.

¶13

Mr. Yadav, learned Advocate for Petitioner submitted that, Petitioner and Respondent No.2 are neighbours and due to intervention of other members of the society, they have arrived at amicable settlement. That, Respondent No.2 is now giving his consent for quashing of the said crime in question.

¶14

Mr. Shukla, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2 submitted that, Respondent No.2 has already filed an Affidavit dated 6^th April 2025 on record. In the said Affidavit, Respondent No.2 has stated that, due to a misunderstanding and a spontaneous altercation occurred between the Petitioner and Respondent No.2, he lodged the present crime. That, the

¶15

2/4

¶16

dtg 17-Wp-2202-2025.doc

¶17

dispute between the Petitioner and Respondent No.2 has now been amicably settled. In para No.4 thereof, Respondent No.2 has given his no objection for quashing of the crime in question.

¶18

4.1) Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court and through his Advocate reiterates the contents of his Affidavit dated 6^th April 2025 and his ‘No Objection’ for quashing of the crime in-question.

¶19

In view of the above, we are inclined to quash R.C.C. No. 1250 of 2025, pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Vasai, arising out of C.R.No. 0207 of 2024, dated 16^th May 2024, registered with Achole Police Station, Mira-Bhayandar, Vasai-Virar, Police Commissionerate, District Palghar, punishable under Sections 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

As we expressed our opinion for quashing of said criminal case, learned Advocate for the Petitioner on instructions submitted that, the Petitioner will pay a cost of Rs.25,000/- to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa’s Advocate Academy and Research Center, within a period of two weeks from the date of uploading of the present Order on the official website of the High Court of Bombay. The said statement is accepted as an undertaking given to this Court.

¶21

We therefore direct the Petitioner to pay a cost of Rs.25,000/- to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa’s Advocate Academy and Research Center within a period of two weeks from the date of uploading of the

¶22

3/4

¶23

dtg 17-Wp-2202-2025.doc

¶24

present Order on the official website of the High Court of Bombay.

¶25

7.1) Details of the bank Account for payment of cost are as under:-

¶26

Account Name	:-	BCMG’S Advocate Academy & Research
		Center
Account Number	:-	000120110001327
Bank Name	:-	Bank of India
Branch Name	:-	Mumbai Main
IFSC Code	:-	BKID0000001
Type of Account	:-	Current A/c

¶27

7.2) Petitioner to pay the said cost of Rs. 25,000/- within stipulated period as noted above and submit its receipt in the Registry of this Court.

¶28

In view of the above and subject to payment of cost, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).

¶29

It is made clear that, if the cost is not paid within stipulated period as mentioned above, Petition shall stand revived automatically and in that event, the trial Court will proceed with the said case expeditiously.

¶30

List the Petition on board on 8^th August 2025, under the caption ‘For Reporting Compliance’ of present Order.

¶31

( RAJESH S. PATIL, J. )

¶32

4/4

Haresh Madhukar Dhanavade v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haresh Madhukar Dhanavade v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Rajini Balkrishna Navadkar and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Prabujotsingh Walia and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Hanmant @Appa Maroti Hatnure and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Nilesh Sharad Dani vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shrinath J. Hullyalkar vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rani Rajendra Rajput and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.