Allowed¶34

Pratik Dansingani and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC14 Jan 2026APL/972/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR and charge-sheet on settlement/amicable resolution; Section 528 BNSS; Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641 relied on; IPC Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34; FIR C.R. No. 732/2023 Samta Nagar Police Station; charge-sheet/Police Report No. 4147/PW/2024 dated 12/09/2024; JMFC 17th Court Borivali; complainant's affidavit X-1 dated 20.01.2026; Criminal Application No. 972 of 2025; Bombay High Court; Ashwin D. Bhobe, J.; 20 January 2026; matrimonial dispute compounded and proceedings closed; no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Application allowed; FIR C.R. No. 732/2023 and charge-sheet/Police Report No. 4147/PW/2024 quashed; criminal proceedings against the Applicants closed; application disposed of with no order as to costs. ¶34

Pratik Dansingani and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR C.R. No. 732/2023 of Samta Nagar Police Station and the charge-sheet/Police Report No. 4147/PW/2024 arising from it should be quashed in view of the amicable settlement/resolution between the parties.

¶28

Court's answer

Considering the nature of the dispute, the settlement arrived at between the parties and the statements made on oath by Respondent No. 2 in her Affidavit (X-1), and guided by the Supreme Court decision in Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641, the Court deemed it fit and proper to exercise powers under Section 528 of the BNSS to secure the ends of justice by quashing the criminal proceedings.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

The FIR bearing C.R. No. 732 of 2023 registered with Samata Nagar Police Station, Mumbai (offences under Sections 498(A), 323, 504 & 506 read with 34 IPC, 1860) and the subsequent charge-sheet/Police Report No. 4147/PW/2024 filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, 17th Court at Borivali, Mumbai are quashed, and the criminal proceedings against the Applicants arising out of the FIR and charge-sheet are closed.

¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ashwin D. Bhobe, J.; 20 January 2026), Criminal Application No. 972 of 2025: Upon an amicable settlement between the parties, with Respondent No. 2 present in Court and executing an Affidavit dated 20.01.2026 (marked X-1) stating that her dispute with Applicant No. 1 stood resolved of her own free will, and with both sides jointly submitting that the proceedings be quashed, the Court — guided by Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641 — exercised its powers under Section 528 of the BNSS to secure the ends of justice and quashed FIR C.R. No. 732/2023 of Samta Nagar Police Station, Mumbai (offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 IPC) together with the charge-sheet/Police Report No. 4147/PW/2024 dated 12/09/2024 filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, 17th Court at Borivali, Mumbai. Criminal proceedings against the Applicants were closed; the Application was allowed and disposed of with no order as to costs.

¶1

41-APL-972-2025.doc

¶2

Gitalaxmi

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 972 OF 2025

¶5

Mr. Pratik Dansingani And Ors.

¶6

...Applicants

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra And Anr.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

Ms. Hemal Shah a/w Ms. Kajal Shukla, learned Advocate for the Applicants.

¶11

Mr. Pratik Dansingani, Applicant No. 1 present through VC. Applicant Nos. 2 & 3 are present in the Court.

¶12

Ms. Pallavi N. Dabholkar, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent.

¶13

Mr. Mandar Surve i/b Ms. Mayuri Hatle, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.

¶14

Respondent No. 2 is present in the Court.

¶15

WAPI Ms. Pooja Chavan attached to Samta Nagar Police Station is present in the Court.

¶16

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 20^th JANUARY 2026.

¶17

P.C. :

¶18

Heard Ms. Hemal Shah, learned Advocate for the Applicants, Ms. Pallavi Dabholkar, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent and Mr. Mandar Surve, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.

¶19

By the present Criminal Application, the Applicants have sought for the following substantive reliefs in terms of prayer clauses 16(B) & (C) :-

¶20

“B. By passing appropriate order bearing the FIR bearing C.R. No. 732/2023 under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w.

Page 1 of 4

41-APL-972-2025.doc

Gitalaxmi

34 of IPC PS. Samta Naga dated 06/11/2023 of the Indian Penal Code may kindly be quashed and set aside.

¶25

C. By passing appropriate order bearing the charge sheet/Police Report bearing No. 4147/PW/2024 dated 12/09/2024 filed before the Judicial Magistrate Of First Class, 17th Court at Borivali, Mumbai for offences punishable under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code may kindly be quashed and set aside. ”

¶26

Applicant No. 1 appears through Video Conference. Ms. Hemal Shah, learned Advocate appearing for the Applicants, identifies Applicant No. 1 and tenders the photostat copy of her Aadhar Card as identity proof. Same is taken on record and marked as “ X ” for identification. Applicant Nos. 2 & 3 are present in the Court and identified by Ms. Hemal Shah.

¶27

Respondent No. 2 is present in the Court along with her Advocate Mr. Mandar Surve. Mr. Mandar Surve tenders Affidavit dated 20.01.2026 of Respondent No. 2 executed before the Notary Advocate S. N. Dhange, Mumbai. Same is taken on record and marked as “ X-1 ” for identification. Respondent No. 2 states that the said Affidavit has been filed by her out of her own free will and without any pressure or coercion from any person. She states that the contents of paragraph Nos. 1 to 5 of the Affidavit dated 20.01.2026 are as per her say. She states that the dispute between her and Applicant No. 1 is resolved.

¶28

Ms. Hemal Shah and Mr. Mandar Surve, in view of the amicable resolution between the parties, they jointly submit that the criminal proceedings may not be continued and the same be quashed.

Page 2 of 4

41-APL-972-2025.doc

Gitalaxmi

Ms. Pallavi Dabholkar, learned A.P.P. submits that in view of the statements made by Respondent No. 2 before this Court and her statements in the Affidavit (X-1), no purpose would be served by continuing with the criminal proceedings. She therefore submits that the impugned First Information Report can be quashed on the basis of statement made by Respondent No. 2 in the Affidavit (X-1).

¶33

Considering the facts as placed before me, the nature of dispute, the settlement arrived between the parties, the statements made on oath by Respondent No. 2 (Affidavit at X-1) and guided by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinbhai Karmur and Others Vs. State of Gujarat and Anr.¹ , to secure ends of justice I deem it fit and proper to exercise powers under Section 528 of the BNSS to quash the criminal proceedings.

¶34

Criminal Application is therefore allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Consequently, FIR bearing C.R. No. 732 of 2023 dated 12.09.2024 registered with Samata Nagar Police Station, Mumbai for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 504 & 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the subsequent charge-sheet/Police Report bearing No. 4147/PW/2024 dated 12.09.2024 filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, 17^th Court at Borivali, Mumbai, are quashed. Criminal proceedings against the Applicants arising out of the said FIR and the chargesheet are closed.

1 (2017) 9 SCC 641.

Page 3 of 4

41-APL-972-2025.doc

Gitalaxmi