Shrikant Charansingh Rathod and Others. vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Pusad

¶1

2026:BHC-NAG:3521-DB

¶2

1 37.APL.691-2025.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 691 OF 2025

¶5

( Shrikant Charansingh Rathod & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. )

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

Mr. M.N. Ali, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. Nikhil Joshi, APP for the Non-applicant No.1/State. Ms. S.V. Dhawas, Advocate h/f Mr. A.P. Thakare, Advocate for the Non-applicant No.2.

¶8

CORAM: URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.

¶9

DATED : 26^th FEBRUARY, 2026

¶10

1 . The present Application is preferred by the Applicants for quashing of the FIR in connection with Crime No.10/2025 registered with Police Station Pusad (Rural), District Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing R.C.C. No.77/2025.

¶11

2 . During the pendency of this Application, the Applicant No.1 and the Non-applicant No.2 entered into the settlement during the mediation process. Mediation report is also before this Court, which shows that the matter is settled. In view of the settlement both have approached to the Civil Judge Senior Division, Pusad, District Yavatmal for obtaining the decree of dissolution of marriage by mutual consent, which is also allowed on 07.02.2026. The Applicant No.1 and Non-applicant No.2 are present before the Court. Learned

¶12

2 37.APL.691-2025.odt

¶13

Counsel for both the parties are present before the Court and submitted that the parties have already settled the dispute and decree in view of settlement for dissolution of marriage is already passed.

¶14

3 . At this stage, the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 , wherein the Court observed that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled, although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored, securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. In this regard, a specific reference was made to offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or a family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim but the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable. The High Court may, within the framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated.

¶15

4 . In view of the above observations and considering

¶16

3 37.APL.691-2025.odt

¶17

that the criminal law is set in motion on the basis of the report lodged, the entire Police machinery have spared their time for the investigation of the said crime as well as the Court has also spared the time, therefore the Application deserves to be allowed subject to the cost. In view of that, I proceed to pass the following order.

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

i. The Application is allowed .

¶20

ii. The First Information Report bearing Crime No. 10/2025 registered with Police Station Pusad (Rural), District Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing R.C.C. No.77/2025, are hereby quashed and set aside against the present Applicants, subject to the cost of Rs.10,000/- by all the Applicants and Rs. 10,000/- by the Non-applicant No.2 to be paid to the “Public Welfare Account” in Account No. 129712010001014 IFSC Code : UBIN0812978 Union Bank of India, Branch High Court, Civil Lines, Nagpur.

¶21

iii. The order will come into effect after depositing the costs.

¶22

5 . Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.

¶23

(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)

¶24

SD. Bhimte

¶25

Signed by: Mr.S.D.Bhimte Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 27/02/2026 19:25:03

Shrikant Charansingh Rathod and Others. v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Pusad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrikant Charansingh Rathod and Others. v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Pusad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Namdev S/O Laxman Shevale vs State of Maharashtra Thr Its Pso Ps Patur Akola and Anr.

Abhijit S/O Namdevrao Ingole vs State of Maharashtra Thr Home Department Mantralaya Mumbai and Others.

Pratibha Shilanand Telgote and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra Thr Police Station Officer of Police Station Telhara Akola

Bhushan Sadashiv Lakhekar and Others. vs State of Maharashtra Thr Police Station Umrekhed

Sachin S/O Nanaji Lekkalwar vs the State of Maharashtra through Pso Mul Ps Tq Mul and Dist Chandrapur

Savita W/O Bhojraj Ganvir vs Bhojraj @ Bhushan S/O Gulabraoji Ganvir