(25&26) APL-939.26&APL-1109.26.DOCX lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.939 OF 2026 Sachin Kisan Shinde : Applicant. Versus. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1109 OF 2026 Sahil Babu Kavale: Applicant. Versus. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents. ----- Mr. Arjun Kode a/w Advocates Ashvin Bansod and Prashant Divate for the Applicants in both the Applications. Ms. Shilpa Talhar, APP for the Respondent No.1/State. Mr. Prajit Manjrekar a/w Mr. Aniket Gavand for Respondent No.2 in both the Applications.. PSI Bhairavnath Shelke, Badlapur East Police Thane City present. ------- CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATED : 25 JUNE 2026 PC:- 1. Heard Mr. Arjun Kode, learned Advocate for the Applicants, Ms. Shilpa Talhar, learned APP for Respondent 1 LAXMIKANT GOPAL CHANDAN Digitally signed by LAXMIKANT GOPAL CHANDAN Date: 2026.06.30 11:22:08 +0530 (25&26) APL-939.26&APL-1109.26.DOCX No.1-State and Mr. Prajit Manjrekar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2. 2. Mr. Arjun Kode, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Mr. Prajit Manjrekar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2, submit that Criminal Application No. 939 of 2026 and Criminal Application No. 1109 of 2026 arise out of FIR No.133 of 2026 dated 02 April 2026 registered with Badlapur (East) Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 137(2), 189(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 351(2) and 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“impugned FIR”). They submit that the Applicants in these Applications are Accused No. 2 and Accused No. 1, respectively, in the impugned FIR and therefore request that both these Applications be taken up for disposal by way of a common order. This request is not opposed by Ms. Shilpa Talhar, learned APP for the Respondent/State. In view of the request, both these Applications are taken up together. 3. Both these Applications under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, are preferred by the Applicants for quashing the impugned FIR. 4. Mr. Arjun Kode, learned Advocate for the Applicants, and Mr. Prajit Manjrekar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2, submit that the subject matter of the impugned FIR was a family dispute between two families. They submit that the issue involved two minors from the said two families. They submit that, out of anger, Respondent No.2 filed the present 2 (25&26) APL-939.26&APL-1109.26.DOCX complaint, which led to the registration of the impugned FIR. They submit that, with the intervention of the elders, family members, and friends, the Applicants and Respondent No.2 have amicably resolved the dispute. They submit that, upon resolution of the dispute, both families have decided to put an end to the criminal proceedings and therefore Respondent No.2 has filed Affidavits dated 25 June 2026 (Two Affidavits) in both these Applications, giving her no objection. They therefore request that the criminal proceedings be quashed. 5. The Applicants in both these Applications are present in Court and they are identified by their Advocate Mr Arjun Kode. He tenders the Photostat copy of the Identity Card of the Applicant in Criminal Application No.939 of 2026, which is taken on record and marked as “X” for identification, as also the Photostat copy of the Identity Card of the Applicant in Criminal Application No.2209 of 2026, which is taken on record and marked as “X” for identification. 6. Respondent No.2 is present in the Court and is identified by her Advocate Mr. Prajit Manjrekar. He tenders the Photostat copy of Respondent No.2’s Identity Card in both the Applications separately, which is taken on record and marked as “X-1” for identification. 7. Mr. Prajit Manjarekar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2, states that the two Affidavits, dated 25 June 2026, are affirmed by Respondent No.2 before the Notary D. A. Dube, Malad (E), Mumbai and are placed on record in both 3 (25&26) APL-939.26&APL-1109.26.DOCX Applications. They are marked independently as “X-2” for identification. 8. Respondent No. 2 states that the Affidavits (X-2) are filed of her own free will and without any pressure or coercion from any person. She states that the contents of the Affidavits (X-2) are as per her say. She submits that she and the Applicants, in the interest of their minor children, have decided to settle the matter and upon settlement she has given her no objection to the quashing of the impugned FIR. She states that to have peace in the family, she wants to bring the criminal proceedings to an end. She states that she would not support the prosecution’s case. She relies on paragraph Nos. 5 to 10 of Criminal Application No. 939 of 2026, which are transcribed herein below in verbatim :- “5. I say that, due to misunderstanding, the present FIR was registered. I say that, as life and future of two minor kids is at stake in the present case i.e my son and niece of the Applicant both the families of the Applicant and my family have decided to put an end to the ongoing case by amicably settling the dispute. I say that, both the parties have decided not to proceed with any case, i.e. present FIR with regard to the present incident in question against the two minor kids from both the side and on this understanding, both the parties have decided to put an end to litigation. In this manner both the parties are requesting this Hon'ble Court to quash an FIR in question. 6. I say that there are no disputes to be settled as there never was any grudge against each other and the alleged incident seems to have occurred only because of the neglect & misunderstanding. There are no controversy between us. 7. I say that I am ready and willing to give my consent for quashing the FIR in question against Mr. Sachin K. 4 (25&26) APL-939.26&APL-1109.26.DOCX Shinde & Sahil Babu Kavale i.e. the Applicant & other unknown Accused persons, bearing F.I.R No. 133 of 2026 at Badlapur (East) Police Station U/S. 137(2), 189(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 351(2), 115(2), 309(4) of BNS. which is pending before the Hon'ble J.M.F.C. Court, Chikhloli, Ambernath, Maharashtra and I undertake to assist the Applicant in taking all the steps and I also undertakes to file the appropriate documents at the appropriate stage if required. 8. I say that nothing also remains in the matter as both parties have come before this Hon'ble Court to settle the issues pending before the Hon'ble J.M.F.C. Chikhloli Court at Ambernath & Badlapur (E) Police station. 9. I say that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the said matter pending. I say that, life & future of two minor children is at stake, and therefore, the present F.I.R may be quashed. 10. I say that I have filed the present Affidavit without any undue influence and without any coercion and without any pressure from anyone including my family members. I say that I have filed the Present Affidavit with free will and in full consciousness.” 9. Ms. Shilpa Talhar, learned APP for the Respondent/State, submits that as the family dispute between the two families involving two minors has been amicably resolved by the parties, the Respondent No.1-State has no objection to the quashing of the impugned FIR. She submits that the police machinery was set in motion in respect of a dispute which otherwise did not warrant police interference, as such she insists on the imposition of costs on the Applicants and the Respondent No. 2. 10. Mr. Arjun Kode, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Mr. Prajit Manjrekar, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2, 5 (25&26) APL-939.26&APL-1109.26.DOCX on instructions, submit that the appropriate costs would be paid. 11. Perusal of the record indicates that the subject matter of the impugned FIR appears to have been a family dispute involving two minor children (one boy and one girl). The relationship between the two minors led to a discord between the two families, resulting in acrimony and the filing of the complaint. Both parties have now settled their dispute amicably. 12. Considering the facts mentioned hereinabove, the submissions of the learned Advocates for the parties, the no objection given by Respondent No.2 in her Affidavits (X-2) and further her statement that she does not intend to support the prosecution case, no useful purpose will be served by allowing the criminal prosecution to continue. 13. Having regard to the pronouncements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab1, Narinder Singh and Ors vs State of Punjab and Anr2 and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai vs The State of Gujarat3, there is no impediment in allowing these Applications. 14. In view of the above, subject to the Applicants in both Applications paying Rs.25,000/- each and the Respondent No.2 paying costs of Rs.25,000/-, both these Criminal 1 2012 10 SCC 303 2 2014 6 SCC 466 3 2017 9 SCC 641 6 (25&26) APL-939.26&APL-1109.26.DOCX Applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Payment of costs is a condition precedent. Consequently, the impugned FIR is quashed. 15. The Applicants and the Respondent No. 2 shall deposit their respective costs in the Account mentioned below within four weeks from today and file the compliance affidavit, along with proof of deposit, in the Registry of this Court on or before 31 July 2026. 16. The Applicant in Criminal Application No.939 of 2026 shall deposit the amount of Rs. 25, 000/-, the Applicant in Criminal Application No.1109 of 2026 shall deposit the amount of Rs.25,000/- and the Respondent No.2 in both these Applications shall deposit the amount of Rs.25,000/- in :- The High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai Account No.: 000120110001337 Bank : Bank of India Branch : Mumbai Main IFSC Code : BKID0000001 17. The Criminal Application Nos. 939 of 2026 and 1109 of 2026 are disposed of. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) 7