Disposed¶20

Ranjit Mhatre and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC21 Apr 2026WP/1954/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay HC, Writ Petition No. 1954 of 2026, Ashwin D. Bhobe J., 21-04-2026; Ranjit Mhatre & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.; petition seeking quash of FIR No. 0601 of 2025 (Bhiwandi Taluka PS; BNS 2023 Ss. 118(1), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 34; Mumbai Children's Act 1948 S. 75) permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to seek discharge after chargesheet/cognizance; discharge application to be considered on own merits; disposed of as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to file an Application seeking discharge in the event a chargesheet is filed and cognizance is taken by the Court; any such discharge Application to be considered by the Trial Court on its own merits and in accordance with law. ¶20

Ranjit Mhatre and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 0601 of 2025 registered at Bhiwandi Taluka Police Station under Ss. 118(1), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 34 of BNS, 2023 and Sec. 75 of Mumbai Children's Act, 1948 should be allowed.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Leave is granted to the Petitioners to withdraw the present Petition, with liberty to file an Application seeking discharge in the event a chargesheet is filed and cognizance is taken by the Court.

¶18

Key takeaways

If an Application seeking discharge is filed by the Petitioners before the Trial Court at the appropriate stage, it shall be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law.ratio¶19
Writ Petition No. 1954 of 2026 is disposed of as withdrawn.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction), Ashwin D. Bhobe, J., 21 April 2026 — Ranjit Mhatre & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., Writ Petition No. 1954 of 2026: Petitioners had sought quashing of FIR No. 0601 of 2025 of Bhiwandi Taluka Police Station for alleged offences under Ss. 118(1), 115(2), 351(2), 352 and 34 of BNS, 2023 and Sec. 75 of Mumbai Children's Act, 1948. After hearing the matter for some time, Petitioners' counsel, on instructions, craved leave to withdraw the Petition with liberty to file an Application seeking discharge in the event a chargesheet was filed and cognizance taken; the learned APP for the State raised no objection. The Court granted leave to withdraw with the liberty prayed for, directed that any discharge Application filed before the Trial Court at the appropriate stage be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law, and disposed of the Petition as withdrawn. No determination was made on the merits of the quashing prayer.

¶1

30-wp-1954-2026.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 1954 OF 2026

¶4

Ranjit Mhatre And Ors. … Petitioners Versus The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. … Respondents

¶5

Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey, for the Petitioners.

¶6

Mrs. Rajeshree Newton, APP for the Respondent – State.

¶7

Mr. N. B. Dandkar, Bhiwandi Taluka Police Station, is present.

¶8

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 21^st April, 2026. P.C. :

¶9

Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey, learned Advocate for the

¶10

Petitioners and Mrs. Rajeshree Newton, learned APP for the Respondent – State.

¶11

By the present Petition, the Petitioners have sought for the following substantive relief in terms of prayer clause (b):-

¶12

b. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant appropriate writ, or order to quash and seta side the impugned FIR bearing no. 0601 of 2025, registered with Bhiwandi Taluka Police Station, for the alleged offence U/s. 118(1), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 34 of BNS, 2023 and Sec. 75 of Mumbai Children’s Act, 1948.

Arjun

30-wp-1954-2026.doc

After having heard the matter for some time, Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey, learned Advocate for the Petitioners, on instructions from the Petitioners craves leave to withdraw the present Petition with liberty to file an Application seeking discharge in the event chargesheet is filed and cognizance is taken by the Court.

¶17

Ms. Rajeshree Newton, learned APP for the Respondent – State, does not object to the request made by Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey.

¶18

In view of the statement made by Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey, learned Advocate for the Petitioners and the no objection by Mrs. Rajeshree Newton, learned APP, leave is granted to withdraw the present Petition with liberty as prayed for.

¶19

In the event an Application seeking discharge is filed by the Petitioners before the Trial Court at the appropriate stage, the same be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law.

¶20

Writ Petition No. 1954 of 2026 is disposed of as withdrawn.

¶21

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by ARJUN ARJUN KRISHNA KRISHNA RODGE RODGE Date: 2026.04.2318:15:18 Arjun +0530

¶23

Ranjit Mhatre and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Mhatre and Ors. v. the 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anand Lalasaheb Bhagat vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mamta @ Priya Vijay Pandey vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Francis Koshappan Kuttikadan vs State of Maharashtra

Godhumal Narayandas Kishnani and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Aditya Subhash More vs the State of Maharashtra

Dipak Somnath Gawari vs State of Maharashtra