Vishal Avinash Madan and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mr. Khopkar, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 jointly submits that the subject dispute of the Crime No. 1731 of 2023 has been amicably resolved between the parties and both the parties

¶12

are seeking quashing of FIR by consent.

¶13

1

¶14

Talwalkar

¶15

39.WP1293.2024.doc

¶16

By the present Petition, the Petitioners have sought for

¶17

the following relief :

¶18

“a) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased, by an appropriate order, or order in the nature of a writ, to quash the FIR No. 1731 of 2023 lodged with Bandra Police Station U/s. 406, 448 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, (Exhibit 'A' to the Petition) and the investigation that has proceeded on the basis thereof in the interest of justice;”

¶19

On 16^th April, 2024, this Court had made the following

¶20

order :

¶21

“1. Not on board. Taken on board.

¶22

Parties have settled the dispute. FIR was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 448, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The complainant had written letter to the Police stating that the matter has been settled and the complainant intends to withdraw the FIR. Thereafter, the Consent Terms are executed between the parties. However, none appears for Respondent no.2.

¶23

Issue notice to Respondent No.2 returnable on 19th June, 2024.

¶24

In the meanwhile, no coercive action shall be initiated against the Petitioners qua the impugned FIR.”

¶25

Today Mr. Khopkar, learned Advocate appears on

¶26

behalf of the Respondent No. 2. He states that the Respondent No. 2 is cancer patient.

¶27

Mr. Kharat, learned Advocate for the Petitioners state

¶28

that the Respondent No. 2 has written a letter to the Senior

2

Talwalkar

39.WP1293.2024.doc

Inspector of Police, Bandra Police Station, Bandra(West), Mumbai stating that he does not wish to pursue the FIR No. 1731 of 2023 and he would not be aggrieved if the said FIR is quashed. Mr. Kharat, learned Advocate for the Petitioners relies on the declaration dated 14^th December, 2023 made by the Respondent No. 2, stating that the Respondent No. 2 has no grievance for quashing the impugned FIR. Letter dated 14.12.2023 and the declaration dated 14.12.2023 are at Exh. D and E (page 41 to 47 of the Petition paper book). Mr. Khopkar states that the document at Exh. D and E are written by the Respondent No. 2 out of his free will and without any pressure from any one.

¶33

Mr. Kharat, learned Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. Khopkar, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 jointly states that the dispute between the Petitioners and Respondent No. 2 has been amicably resolved by them and therefore, they pray for quashing of the FIR.

¶34

Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, learned APP for the State submits that in view of the documents at pages 41 to 47 and the

3

Talwalkar

39.WP1293.2024.doc

statement made by Mr. Khopkar, no purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings and therefore, states that the impugned FIR be quashed.

¶39

Considering the observations made by this Court on 16^th April, 2024, the documents at page 41 to 47 and the submissions made by Mr. Kharat, learned Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. Khopkar, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 as also submissions of the learned APP for the State and having regards to the judicial pronouncement of the Apex Court in Gian Singh v/s. State of Punjab¹ , there is no impediment in allowing this Petition.

¶40

Writ Petition No. 1293 of 2024 is therefore allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Consequently, FIR bearing No. 1731 of 2023 lodged with the Bandra Police Station, Bombay is quashed.

¶41

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶42

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

¶43

1(2012) 10 SCC 303

¶44

4

¶45

Talwalkar

Vishal Avinash Madan and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Avinash Madan and Anr. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sher Banu Asjad Karolia vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Varun Jayesh Madlani and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rohan Ramprasad Katkade vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Gurpreet Malhi vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

M/S Govinda Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. vs the Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.

Sadanand Appa Dhumal vs The Sfate of Maharashtra