21.WP.4736.2025.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4736 OF 2025 Om Pandurang Shrikhande, Age : 19 Years, Occu : Education, R/o. At Post Khandali, Tal. Mohol, Dist. Solapur ...PETITIONER VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra, Through Senior Inspector, Mohol Police Station, Mohol, Solapur. 2. Ranjeet Dharma Shrikhande, Age : 38 Years, Occu : Agriculturist, 3. Shantabai alias Shanta Dharma Shrikhande, Age : 60 Years, Occu : Housewife, R/o. At Post Khandali, Tal. Mohol, Dist. Solapur. ...RESPONDENTS *** Mr. Omkar Arun Mane (Through V.C.), Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Pankaj P. Deokar, APP for Respondent – State. Ms. Neha G. Deshpande, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. *** CORAM : ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. DATE : OCTOBER 08, 2026 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties at the admission stage. Shrikant Malani 2026:BHC-KOL:9886 21.WP.4736.2025.odt 2. The Petitioner seeks to quash the First Information Report No. 998 of 2022 (dated 14th November 2022) registered at Mohol Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 341, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”), and has preferred this Writ Petition. 3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 jointly submitted that the matter has been amicably settled between them. Therefore, they urged the Court to quash the FIR. 4. On 14th November, 2022, the informant Ranjeet lodged a report against the Petitioner and three other persons alleging that on 13th November, 2022, they assaulted him with an axe and an iron rod, thereby causing injuries to him. Based on the report, the police registered an offence against the Petitioner and three other persons for the offences referred to above. 5. Based on the registration of the FIR, the investigation was conducted, and a charge-sheet was filed against the accused Yuvraj, Pandurang and Reshma before the learned Trial Court. At the time of the incident, the Petitioner was a minor and therefore, no charge-sheet was filed against him before the learned Sessions Court. Shrikant Malani 21.WP.4736.2025.odt 6. The learned counsel for the Petitioner also submitted that the Accused – Yuvraj, Pandurang and Reshma were acquitted in Sessions Case No.90 of 2023 on 30th January 2026. Accordingly, he tendered a copy of the said judgment across the bar. The same is taken on record. In view of the settlement of the matter, the learned counsel for the Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 urged that the FIR against the Petitioner be quashed. 7. The learned APP, on instructions, submitted that no charge-sheet has been filed against the Petitioner either in the Sessions Court or before the Juvenile Justice Board till this date. Having considered the acquittal of the other accused persons, and settlement of the matter, he submitted to the Court's order. 8. The learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 submitted that the informant – Ranjeet and injured Shantabai are present in Court and they have no objection to the quashing of the said FIR against the Petitioner. Accordingly, the informant and the injured have tendered their affidavits across the bar. The same are taken on record. They have also given consent to quash the FIR. Shrikant Malani 21.WP.4736.2025.odt 9. The Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, i.e. the informant – Ranjeet and injured Shantabai, are present in Court, and their respective counsel has identified them. 10. Having considered the above facts and gone through the record, it appears that the Accused Yuvraj, Pandurang and Reshma were acquitted in Sessions Case No. 90 of 2023 on 30th January 2026. Till this date, no charge- sheet has been filed against the Petitioner either in the Sessions Court or before the learned Juvenile Justice Board. On perusal of the FIR and the victims' medical certificates, the ingredients of Section 307 IPC are not prima facie attracted against the Petitioner. The injuries sustained by the victims are simple. 11. Apart from that, the Petitioner and the victims are present in Court, and their respective counsel identifies them. They submitted that the matter has been settled between them; therefore, Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have no objection to quashing the FIR against the Petitioner. The informant, Ranjeet, and the injured, Shantabai, have admitted the contents of their respective affidavits. In the Affidavit, Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 categorically aver that they do not wish to continue with FIR bearing Crime No. 998 of 2022 against the Petitioner and have consented to quashing it. Shrikant Malani 21.WP.4736.2025.odt 12. Moreover, the learned counsel for the Petitioner voluntarily submitted that the Petitioner is ready to deposit an amount of ₹ 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) with the Bombay High Court Kolhapur Bench Bar Association, Ad-Hoc Committee, Kolhapur (Circuit Bench, Kolhapur) within a week towards the costs for rotating the Police and other machinery. 13. In view of the aforesaid facts, the no objection given by the informant and the injured/victim to the quashing of the F.I.R and the proceedings, if any, arising therefrom, and having regard to the nature of the offence, which is neither heinous nor anti-social and appears to have arisen out of trivial issues, I am of the considered view that the continuation of the proceedings against the Petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law and would not serve the ends of justice. Thus, this is a fit case to exercise the inherent powers of this Court to quash the FIR. 14. In the result, the Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to deposit of costs of Rs. 5,000/- as stated above. 15. Accordingly, the FIR bearing Crime No. 998 of 2022 dated 14th November 2022 registered with Mohol Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 341, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the proceedings, if any, arising pursuant to the said FIR are hereby quashed and set aside, subject to costs of 5,000/- ₹ Shrikant Malani 21.WP.4736.2025.odt (Rupees Five Thousand only). 16. The Petitioner is directed to deposit the costs of ₹ 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) with the Bombay High Court Kolhapur Bench Bar Association, Ad-Hoc Committee, Kolhapur Bench (Circuit Bench, Kolhapur), failing which the order passed today shall stand vacated automatically without further reference to the Court. 17. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. 18. List the matter “For Compliance” on 16th October 2026. (ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) Shrikant Malani