Allowed¶21

Yash Prakash Bohra and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC21 Jul 2025WP/3948/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Consent quashing of matrimonial-dispute case: Bombay HC Criminal Writ Petition 3948/2024 allowed 18-08-2025 (Gadkari & Patil, JJ.); quashing of C.C. 4060/PW/2024 / FIR CR 0110/2024 (Dahisar PS, 02-01-2024) under Ss.498A, 341, 323, 504, 506, 406 r/w 34 IPC; informant (wife) gave affidavit of even date and personal no-objection after divorce on 05-05-2025 before Personal Status Court, Dubai (Certificate of Separation 2025/M/671; Federal Decree Law 2022/41 Non-Muslims); Article 226 writ; amendment allowed; no precedent cited or discussed.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; quashing of C.C. No. 4060/PW/2024 (case arising out of CR No.0110 of 2024, Dahisar Police Station) in terms of prayer clause (b) and amended prayer clause (b-1). ¶21

Yash Prakash Bohra and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed; quashing of C.C. No. 4060/PW/2024 (case arising out of CR No.0110 of 2024, Dahisar Police Station) in terms of prayer clause (b) and amended prayer clause (b-1).

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether C.C. No. 4060/PW/2024 (arising out of CR No.0110 of 2024, Dahisar Police Station, under Sections 498A, 341, 323, 504, 506, 406 r/w 34 IPC, lodged by Respondent No.2) should be quashed, the Petition having been filed for quashing with the consent of Respondent No.2, the informant, who after divorce stated she had no objection.

¶16

Court's answer

The Court acted on Respondent No.2's Affidavit dated 18 August 2025 (recording the Dubai divorce and her statement that she has no objection if the Application is allowed and the crime is quashed and set aside and all Petitioners are discharged/acquitted), which she personally confirmed in Court through her Advocate.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Leave to amend granted to incorporate challenge to C.C. No. 4060/PW/2024 in the prayer clauses, the amendment to be carried out during the course of the day.

¶14

Key takeaways

Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) and amended prayer clause (b-1), i.e., quashing of the criminal case arising out of CR No.0110 of 2024 (C.C. No. 4060/PW/2024).ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction), Coram A.S. Gadkari and Rajesh S. Patil, JJ., 18 August 2025 - Criminal Writ Petition No. 3948 of 2024 (Yash Prakash Bohra & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.). Husband (Petitioner No.1) and his father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law (Petitioners Nos.2-4, i.e., the relatives of Respondent No.2) filed a Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing of C.C. No. 4060/PW/2024, pending on the file of the 26th JMFC, Borivali, Mumbai, arising out of CR No.0110 of 2024 dated 2 January 2024 registered with Dahisar Police Station under Sections 498A, 341, 323, 504, 506, 406 r/w 34 IPC, with the consent of Respondent No.2, the informant. Leave to amend to incorporate challenge to the C.C. in the prayer clauses was granted. Respondent No.2's Advocate tendered her Affidavit dated 18 August 2025 stating that she and Petitioner No.1 had divorced on 5 May 2025 before the Personal Status Court, Dubai, UAE (Certificate of Separation No.2025/M/671, in accordance with Federal Decree Law No.2022/41 regarding Personal Status matters for Non-Muslims; Family Agreement dated 4 March 2025, File No.2025/36, as consent terms), and that she had no objection if the Application was allowed and the crime quashed with all Petitioners discharged/acquitted. She was personally present and reiterated the no objection through her Advocate. In view of this, the Petition was allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) and amended prayer clause (b-1).

¶1

KIRAN SANJAY GHUGE Digitally signed by KIRAN SANJAYGHUGE Date: 2025.08.26 17:41:36 +0530

¶2

KSG 63-WP-3948-2024.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3948 OF 2024

¶5

Yash Prakash Bohra & Ors. … Petitioners

¶6

V/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents

¶8

Mr. Omprakash Pandey a/w Ms. Suchita Pandey, Ms.Pramila Prajapati, for Petitioners.

¶9

Mr.Ashish I. Satpute, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State. Mr.Dharmendra Damani, for Respondent No.2.

¶10

Mr. G.R. Phad, PSI attached to Dahisar Police Station.

¶11

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ. DATE : 18^th August, 2025.

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

Leave to amend to incorporate challenge to C.C. No.

¶14

4060/PW/2024 in the prayer clauses, granted. Amendment be carried out during the course of the day.

¶15

Husband (Petitioner No.1), father-in-law (Petitioner No.2),

¶16

mother-in-law (Petitioner No.3) and sister-in-law (Petitioner No.4) of Respondent No.2 have filed this Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for quashing of C.C. No. 4060/PW/2024, pending on the file of 26^th Judicial Magistrate First Class, at Borivali, Mumbai, arising out of CR No.0110 of 2024, dated 2^nd January, 2024, registered with Dahisar Police Station, Mumbai, under Sections 498A, 341, 323, 504, 506, 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, with the consent of Respondent No.2, the informant.

¶17

1/2

¶18

KSG 63-WP-3948-2024.doc

¶19

Learned Advocate Mr.Damani appearing for Respondent No.2 tendered across the bar her Affidavit dated 18^th August, 2025, duly affirmed before a Notary Public. In paragraph No.2 thereof, it is stated that, the Applicant No.1 and Respondent No.2 have already taken divorce on 5^th May, 2025, before the Personal Status Court, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, under Certificate of Separation No.2025/M/671, in accordance with Federal Decree Law No.2022/41 regarding Personal Status matters for Non-Muslims & have also submitted a Family Agreement dated 4^th March, 2025, under File No.2025/36, to be treated as consent terms filed therein which both of them agreed to abide. The copy of said separation Order and other relevant documents are annexed to the said Affidavit. In paragraph No.3 thereof, the Respondent No.2 has stated that, she has no objection if the present Application is allowed and the crime is quashed and set aside and all the Petitioners are discharged/acquitted from the said case.

¶20

3.1) Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court and through her Advocate reiterates the contents of her Affidavit dated 18^th August, 2025 and her ‘No Objection’ for quashing of the crime in question.

¶21

In view of the above, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) and amended prayer clause (b-1).

¶22

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

¶23

2/2

Yash Prakash Bohra and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yash Prakash Bohra and Ors. 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

Kalpesh Ishwarlal Patel vs Ila Pravin Solani and Anr.

Uma Suriyanarayanan and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mohd Belal Uddin and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra

Sushil Ghanshyam Agarwal and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ramesh B. Pokhriyal and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Ajinkya Vikas Patil vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.