Rajiv Rajendrasingh Pradhan vs the Union Territory… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2026)

Rajiv Rajendrasingh Pradhan vs the Union Territory… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of FIR No. 75 of 2025 and charge-sheet No. 89 of 2025 registered at Nani Daman Police Station, Daman, and of the criminal proceedings in RCC No. 191 of 2025, in terms of prayer clause (a); conditional upon Respondent No. 2 depositing cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the DNH & DD Police Welfare Society account within two weeks and filing a compliance affidavit with proof of deposit in the Registry of this Court on or before 9th March, 2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings in RCC No. 191 of 2025 before the Civil Judge Junior Division, Daman, arising out of FIR/CR No. 75 of 2025 of Nani Daman Police Station (offence under section 64(1) BNS, 2023) together with the charge-sheet, ought to be quashed, given Respondent No. 2's resiling and no objection, on the footing that no purpose would be served in continuing them. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering Respondent No. 2's statement recorded before the Magistrate under Section 183(5) BNSS and her affidavit ('X-1'), no purpose would be served in continuing with the criminal proceedings.

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the Supreme Court pronouncements in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, there is no impediment in allowing the Application.

Key takeaways

The Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), subject to payment of cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- by Respondent No. 2.ratio¶9
Consequently, FIR No. 75 of 2025 and charge-sheet No. 89 of 2025 registered at Nani Daman Police Station, Daman are quashed.ratio¶9
Respondent No. 2 is directed to deposit the cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- in the specified account within two weeks (with compliance affidavit and proof of deposit in the Registry on or before 9th March, 2026, per the continuation of the operative paragraph).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction (Ashwin D. Bhobe, J.), 5th February, 2026, Criminal Application No. 1551 of 2025 — Rajiv Rajendrasingh Pradhan v. The Union Territory of Daman and Diu. Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and s. 528 BNSS sought quashing of criminal proceedings before the Civil Judge Junior Division, Daman in RCC No. 191 of 2025, arising out of FIR/CR No. 75 of 2025 of Nani Daman Police Station for offence under section 64(1) BNS, 2023, and the charge-sheet therein (charge-sheet No. 89 of 2025), invoking Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303. The complainant (Respondent No. 2), who had alleged the offence in her police statement dated 06.10.2025, resiled through a statement recorded under Section 183(5) BNSS before the Magistrate and, by affidavit affirmed 15th January, 2026 (marked 'X-1', stated to be voluntary and uncoerced), gave her no objection to quashing; counsel for the Union Territory (Special Counsel) agreed the FIR and proceedings could be quashed, subject to imposition of cost. Holding that no purpose would be served in continuing the criminal proceedings, and having regard to Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, the court found no impediment, allowed the Application in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to Respondent No. 2 paying cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- (payable to DNH & DD Police Welfare Society, SBI A/c 36004058950, IFSC SBIN0002671, within two weeks, compliance affidavit by 9th March, 2026), and quashed FIR No. 75 of 2025 and charge-sheet No. 89 of 2025.

902-APL-1551-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1551 OF 2025

Rajiv Rajendrasingh Pradhan ...Applicant V/S. The Union Territory Of Daman And Diu … Respondents

Mr. Aniket Nikam a/w Ronak Desai, for the Applicant. Mr. Ashwin Thool a/w Archishmati Chandramore and Ayush Singh, for the Respondent No. 1 (Union Territory of Daman and Diu)

Mr. Anjaykumar Kori, for the Respondent No. 2.

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 5^th FEBRUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

By the present Application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (‘BNSS’), the Applicant has sought for the following relief :-

1

Arjun

902-APL-1551-2025.doc

“a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside criminal proceedings against the petitioner before Hon'ble Civil Judge Junior Division, Daman in RCC No. 191 of 2025 arising out of FIR/CR No. 75 of 2025 registered by Nani Daman Police Station for offence under section 64 (1) BNS, 2023 and the charge-sheet therein in view of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303.”

Applicant (Mr. Rajiv Rajendrasingh Pradhan) is present in Court along with his Advocate Mr. Aniket Nikam. Photostat copy of the Applicant’s Aadhar Card is taken on record and marked as ‘X’ for identification.

Respondent No.2 is present in Court along with her Advocate Mr. Anjaykumar Kori.

Mr. Aniket Nikam and Mr. Anjaykumar Kori submit that the complaint filed by the Respondent No. 2 against the Applicant was on account of misunderstanding. They submit that the Respondent No. 2 has realized her mistake and therefore she has no objection to quash the criminal proceedings. They submit that the statement of Respondent No.2 is recorded under Section 183(5) of B.N.S.S., 2023.

2

Arjun

902-APL-1551-2025.doc

Mr. Anjaykumar Kori tenders affidavit affirmed by the Respondent No. 2 on 15^th January, 2026 along with photostat copy of her identity card, same are taken on record and marked ‘X-1’ and ‘X-2’, respectively for identification.

Respondent No. 2 states that the affidavit (X-1) is filed out of her own free will and without any pressure or coercion from any person. She states that the contents of the affidavit (X-1) are as per her say. She reiterates her no objection for quashing of the criminal proceedings.

Mr. Ashwin Thool, Special Counsel, for the Respondent No. 1, states that though the Respondent No. 2 had made allegations against the Applicant in her statement dated 06.10.2025 recorded by the Police, the Respondent no. 2 in her statement recorded under Section 183(5) of B.N.S.S., 2023 has resiled from the her earlier statement. He submits that the Respondent No. 2 has taken proceedings for granted. He however submits that the impugned FIR and the criminal proceedings can be quashed, however subject to imposition of cost.

3

Arjun

902-APL-1551-2025.doc

Considering the above said circumstances, the statement made by Respondent no. 2 before the Magistrate recorded under Section 183(5) of B.N.S.S., 2023, the statements made by the Respondent No. 2 in her affidavit ( “X-1” ) no purpose would be served in continuing with the criminal proceedings. Having regards to the pronouncements of the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab¹ , Narinder Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr² and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai vs The State Of Gujarat³ there is no impediment in allowing this Application.

In view of the above, subject to payment of cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- by the Respondent No. 2, this Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Consequently, the FIR bearing No. 75 of 2025 and chargesheet bearing No. 89 of 2025, registered Nani Daman Police Station, Daman are quashed.

Respondent No. 2 is directed to deposit the cost of Rs.1,00,000/- in the below mentioned account within two weeks

1 2012 10 SCC 303

2 2014 6 SCC 466

3 2017 9 SCC 641

4

Arjun

902-APL-1551-2025.doc

from today and to file compliance Affidavit along with proof of

deposit in the Registry of this Court on or before 9^th March, 2026;-

DNH & DD Police Welfare Society

Bank :-	State Bank Of India
Account No. :-	36004058950
IFSC :-	SBIN0002671

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

5

Arjun