109. WP 3397-2025.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3397 OF 2025 Gaurav Chavan & anr. .Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra & anr. .Respondents Mr. Aniruddha Lad a/w. Mr. Sameer Singh, Advocates, for the Petitioners Mr. A. A. Palkar, APP, for Respondent No. 1 – State Mr. Ojas Kocharekar, Advocate, for Respondent No. 2 CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : 11.09.2026 P. C. 1. Heard Mr. Lad, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Mr. Palkar, learned APP for Respondent No. 1 – State and Mr. Kocharekar, learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2. 2. Parties are young offenders before me, who had a scuffle after finishing their law examination due to which the FIR came to be lodged on account of the First Informant suffering simple injury. Parties have reconciled and have urged the Court to quash the present proceeding by consent quashing so that the parties can be free to pursue their goals in life without the ignominy of the Criminal proceedings. 3. Considering the issue between the parties, I am inclined to Anand 1 of 4 ANAND SUDHAKAR SUDAME Digitally signed by ANAND SUDHAKAR SUDAME Date: 2026.09.19 15:04:13 +0530 109. WP 3397-2025.doc accept the request made by the parties. Consent Affidavit of Respondent No. 2 dated 13.08.2025 is filed in Court. Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and confirms filing of the Consent Affidavit. The Petition, therefore, stands allowed. 4. Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 conferred inherent powers on High Courts to pass such orders as are justified to give effect to any order in the Court, prevent abuse of process of any Court or secure the ends of justice. In the BNSS this provision stands incorporated with Section 528 which substantially reproduces the language and intent of Section 482 of the CRPC, 1973 High Courts invoke this provision to step in where cases have been instituted with malafide motives or to harass the accused person thereby avoiding procedural harassment. It empowers Court to dismiss FIRs or criminal proceedings if there is no prima facie case or evidence against the accused person/s or if orders are made in violation of the principles of natural justice. The exercise of such powers under Section 482 of CRPC and now Section 528 of BNSS remains discretionary and varies from case to case. 5. In State of Harayana vs Bhajan Lal1 the Supreme Court laid down model categories and guidelines in paragraph No. 102 of the said judgment in which the FIRs can be quashed. The Supreme Court has 1 1992 AIR 604 Anand 2 of 4 109. WP 3397-2025.doc further asserted that power under Section 482 is an acknowledgment of "powers inherent" and not the source of powers additional. It has held that even non compoundable offences can be quashed where necessary. It has held that High Courts have to decide whether the prosecution of an offence would further or be against the interest of justice. It is also held that grievous offences such as murder, rape, and dacoity cannot ordinarily be quashed even after settlement because they involve societal implication. 6. In the above context, when parties settle their private dispute or the lis between them is purely civil and commercial or matrimonial and the offence is not heinous or does not impact the society at large, the Court can consider such request. In such a case awarding costs for putting the criminal law into motion on the act of the accused persons and thereafter both parties seeking quashing of proceedings by consent, in my opinion, can be considered by Court which can impose costs on the parties, especially so in matters coming before the Court by “consent quashing”. 7. Applying the aforesaid principles to the facts of the present case, I am of the opinion that the Petitioners, for their actions resulting in the complainant invoking criminal proceedings and now both the parties seeking quashing by consent. There shall be no order as to Anand 3 of 4 109. WP 3397-2025.doc costs. 8. In view of the above matter, the present Petition deserves to be allowed. It is so allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘A’ which reads thus:- “A) This Hon’ble High Court be pleased to quash and set aside the F.I.R. bearing C. R. No. 79 of 2025 dated 23.04.2025, registered with Deccan Police Station, Pune, for alleged offences Punishable under Sections 118(1), 351(2), 352 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 off and in the meantime.” 9. Writ Petition is allowed and disposed. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) Anand 4 of 4