21.WP.2735.2025.doc HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.) IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2735 OF 2025 Sandip Babu Jaitapkar and Anr. .. Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents ....................  Mr. Arun K. Rajput, Advocate h/for Mr. Amrish R. Salunke for Applicant.  Mr. Sukanta A. Karmakar, APP for Respondent No.1 – State.  Mr. Sunil Kumar Gupta, Advocate for Respondent No.2 – Orig. Complainant.  PSI – Ms. Rupali Sanap, Chembur Police Station present. ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 24, 2026 P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Rajput, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr. Karmakar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.1 – State and Mr. Gupta, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2 – original Complainant. 2. This is an Application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of the First Information Report. 3. Respondent No.2 has filed the Affidavit of Consent / No Objection dated 24.09.2026. Said Affidavit prima facie shows that the compensation amount has been paid to the wife of the deceased, pursuant to the last hearing by way of RTGS transfer as stated therein and also in addition to the earlier payment made to her and also the fact that she has accepted the same and the Complainant has no 1 of 3 21.WP.2735.2025.doc further grievances whatsoever. 4. In that view of the matter, adhering to the request made by the party and more specifically the Petitioners before me who are young offenders who had started their electrical business, I am inclined to accept the request for consent quashing and quash the criminal proceedings. 5. 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. 2 of 3 21.WP.2735.2025.doc 6. In State of Harayana vs Bhajan Lal 1 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 furthered 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. 7. In view of the above, learned Advocates persuade the Court to allow the Petition by consent quashing. The Petition stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (i) which read thus:- “i) This Hon’ble Court may graciously be please to quash and set aside Crime lodged at the instance of Chembur Police Station, Mumbai Vide C.r. No. 38 of 2025.” 8. In view of the above, Criminal Writ Petition is disposed. 9. However, there shall be no order as to costs. H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] 1 1992 AIR 604 3 of 3 AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Digitally signed by AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Date: 2026.09.28 09:36:34 +0530