Dismissed¶9

Sachin Ashok Pawar and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC23 Jan 2026APL/1469/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of quashing application under S.528 BNSS; FIR CR. No. 436 of 2023, Yeola Taluka Police Station, Yeola; offences u/s 498A, 406, 323, 504, 506, 34 IPC; charge-sheet dated 19/09/2025; dispute stated amicably settled; Respondent No. 2 consented to withdrawal; APP raised no objection; dismissed as withdrawn; no merits adjudicated; Bombay High Court, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction; Ashwin D. Bhobe, J.; 28-01-2026.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; leave granted to withdraw the Application, which was dismissed as withdrawn. No quashing of the FIR or charge-sheet was effected and no direction issued on them. ¶9

Sachin Ashok Pawar and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; leave granted to withdraw the Application, which was dismissed as withdrawn. No quashing of the FIR or charge-sheet was effected and no direction issued on them.

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR bearing CR. No. 436 of 2023 registered at Yeola Taluka Police Station, Yeola, and the charge-sheet dated 19/09/2025 (offences punishable u/s 498A, 406, 323, 504, 506, 34 IPC) should be quashed and set aside by consent of Respondent No. 2 — framed by the Applicants in prayer clause (b); not adjudicated, as the Application was withdrawn.

¶1

Court's answer

Criminal Application No. 1469 of 2025 was dismissed as withdrawn; consequently the quashing prayer concerning FIR CR. No. 436 of 2023 and the charge-sheet dated 19/09/2025 was not adjudicated on merits.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

Leave was granted to the Applicants to withdraw Criminal Application No. 1469 of 2025, in view of the request made by their Advocate.

¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Application No. 1469 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction), Coram: Ashwin D. Bhobe, J., decided 28 January 2026. Filed under Section 528 of the BNSS by Sachin Ashok Pawar & Ors., the Application sought (prayer clause (b)) quashing and setting aside of FIR CR. No. 436 of 2023 registered at Yeola Taluka Police Station, Yeola, for offences punishable u/s 498A, 406, 323, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, together with the charge-sheet dated 19/09/2025, by consent of Respondent No. 2. Identities of Applicant No. 1 (present in Court) and Respondent No. 2 were verified and their identity cards taken on record ('X' and 'X-1'); Applicant Nos. 2 to 7 appeared by video conference. Counsel on both sides jointly submitted that the dispute stood amicably settled, whereupon the Applicants' Advocate craved leave to withdraw the Application; Respondent No. 2's Advocate consented and the learned APP for the State raised no objection. Leave was granted and the Application was dismissed as withdrawn. The merits of the quashing prayer were therefore not adjudicated and no holding arises on the FIR or the charge-sheet from this order.

¶1

50-APL-1469-2025.doc

¶2

Digitally signed GAYATRI by GAYATRIRAJENDRA RAJENDRA SHIMPI SHIMPI Date:2026.01.30 20:10:25 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1469 OF 2025

¶5

Sachin Ashok Pawar & Ors. … Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents

¶6

Ms. Mrunmai Kailas Rokade, Advocate for Applicants. Ms. Ankita Balasaheb Ugalmugale, Advocate for Respondent No. 2. Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, APP for Respondent No. 1 – State.

¶7

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 28^th JANUARY, 2026.

¶8

P.C. :

¶9

By the present Application filed under Section 528 of

¶10

BNSS, the Applicants have sought for the following substantive relief in prayer clause (b):-

¶11

“b) Quash and set aside FIR bearing CR. No. 436 of 2023 registered at Yeola Taluka Police Station, Yeola for the offence’s punishable u/s 498A, 406, 323, 504, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code and charge-sheet dated 19/09/2025 by consent of respondent no. 2.”

¶12

Ms. Mrunmai Kailas Rokade, learned Advocate for

¶13

Applicants states that the Applicant No. 1 is present in Court and

Gayatri shimpi

50-APL-1469-2025.doc

Applicant Nos. 2 to 7 are appearing through V. C. Ms. Mrunmai Kailas Rokade, identifies all the Applicants. She tenders photostat copy of the identity card of Applicant No. 1, same is taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification.

¶18

Ms. Ankita Balasaheb Ugalmugale, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2 states that the Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and she identifies her. She tenders photostat copy of the identity card of Respondent No. 2, same is taken on record and marked as ‘X-1’ for identification.

¶19

Ms. Mrunmai Kailas Rokade and Ms. Ankita Balasaheb Ugalmugale jointly submit that the dispute between the Aplicants and the Respondent No. 2 is amicably settled.

¶20

Ms. Mrunmai Kailas Rokade on instructions from the Applicant No. 1 present in Court and Applicant Nos. 2 to 7 appearing through V. C craves leave to withdraw this Application.

¶21