Judgment 1 J-APL No.1486.2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1486 OF 2026 1) Shri Amol S/o. Ramesh Zungre, Aged about 42 years, Occ. NIL, R/o. Plot No. 232, Mahalaxmi, Gurudeo Nagar, Nandanvan, Nagpur – 440009. 2) Shri Ramesh S/o. Shivram Zungre, Aged about 73 years, Occ. Retired, R/o. Plot No. 232, Mahalaxmi, Gurudeo Nagar, Nandanvan, Nagpur – 440009. 3) Smt. Kiran W/o. Ramesh Zungre, Aged about 61 years, Occ. Household, R/o. Plot No. 232, Mahalaxmi, Gurudeo Nagar, Nandanvan, Nagpur – 440009. …. APPLICANTS // VERSUS // 1) State of Maharashtra, through Officer in-charge of Police Station, Bhadravati, District : Chandrapur - 442902. 2) Smt. Suvarna W/o. Amol Zungre, Aged about 33 years, Occ. Nil, R/o. Gurudev Layout, Plot No.232, Hamu Aknath Bavane, Ishwar Nagar, Behind Bhadravati Bus Stand, Gautam Nagar, Bhadravati, Chandrapur – 442902. …. N ON-APPLICANTS _____________________________________________________________ Mr. Riddharth Shah, Advocate for applicants. Mr. H.D. Futane, Assistant Public Prosecutor for non-applicant No.1. Mr. Yohan Chougule, Advocate for non-applicant No.2. _____________________________________________________________ 2026:BHC-NAG:8775 Judgment 2 J-APL No.1486.2026.odt CORAM : M.W. CHANDWANI, J. DATED : JULY 10, 2026 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. The present application is filed for quashing of the First Information Report (FIR) No.458/2024, dated 16.09.2024, registered with Police Station, Bhadravati, District Chandrapur for the offence punishable under Sections 85 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNS”), consequent chargesheet No.110/2025, dated 02.07.2025 and Regular Criminal Case No.128/2025, pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhadravati, District Chandrapur. 3. Applicant No.1 is the husband and applicant Nos.2 and 3 are the father-in-law and the mother-in-law of the complainant/non- applicant No.2 respectively. Marriage between applicant No.1 and non-applicant No.2 was solemnized on 06.05.2014. On 16.09.2024, non-applicant No.2 lodged the present complaint with Police Station, Bhadravati, District Chandrapur alleging that applicant No.1 was not happy with the dowry given by the parents of the complainant in the marriage. On the date of her marriage itself, the applicants abused non-applicant No.2 on account of bringing less gift articles. On the Judgment 3 J-APL No.1486.2026.odt next day of marriage as well, applicant No.1 repeatedly insulted the complainant, likewise applicant Nos.2 and 3 also joined hands with applicant No.1 and started harassing the complainant/non-applicant No.2 on account of not providing sufficient dowry in the marriage. When non-applicant No.2 was pregnant, the applicants harassed her for bringing an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. On 15.04.2015, applicant Nos.2 and 3 also abused and quarreled with the mother and sister of non-applicant No.2 on account of not giving the amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. On 07.02.2016, applicant No.2 dropped non-applicant No.2 at Mumbai, where applicant No.1 resided. Applicant No.1 used to suspect her character and also used to assault non-applicant No.2. During the Covid pandemic, when non-applicant No.2 resided with applicant Nos.2 and 3 at Nagpur, they harassed her. Since, 28.08.2021, non-applicant No.2 is residing with her parents. On the complaint of the complainant, the aforesaid offence came to be registered against the applicants. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicants seeks quashing of the FIR on the ground of settlement between the parties. Non-applicant No.2/complainant has suo moto appeared through her counsel and filed an affidavit on record. She is present in Court today and has been duly identified by her counsel. The complainant admits the Judgment 4 J-APL No.1486.2026.odt contents of the affidavit and submits that the matter has been resolved amicably between the parties before the learned Mediator at Family Court, Nagpur, wherein they have decided to part ways and are seeking mutual divorce from the Family Court. Non-applicant No.2 has stated in the affidavit that she does not want to prosecute the applicants in the instant criminal case and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed. 5. Considering the fact that it is a matrimonial dispute and both the parties have amicably settled their dispute before the Mediator at Family Court, Nagpur and applicant No.1 and non- applicant No.2 have decided to part ways to lead their future life peacefully, the proceedings pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bhadravati may become a hindrance in their peaceful life. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, has held as under : “10. [In State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy [(1977) 2 SCC 699 : 1977 SCC (Cri) 404] considering the scope of inherent power of quashing under Section 482, this Court held that in the exercise of this wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash proceedings if it comes to the conclusion that the ends of justice so require. It was observed that in a criminal case, the veiled object behind a lame prosecution, the very nature of the material on Judgment 5 J-APL No.1486.2026.odt which the structure of the prosecution rests and the like would justify the High Court in quashing the proceeding in the interest of justice and that the ends of justice are higher than the ends of mere law though justice had got to be administered according to laws made by the legislature. This Court said that the compelling necessity for making these observations is that without a proper realization of the object and purpose of the provision which seeks to save the inherent powers of the High Court to do justice between the State and its subjects, it would be impossible to appreciate the width and contours of that salient jurisdiction. On facts, it was also noticed that there was no reasonable likelihood of the accused being convicted of the offence. What would happen to the trial of the case where the wife does not support the imputations made in the FIR of the type in question. As earlier noticed, now she has filed an affidavit that the FIR was registered at her instance due to temperamental differences and implied imputations. There may be many reasons for not supporting the imputations. It may be either for the reason that she has resolved disputes with her husband and his other family members and as a result thereof she has again started living with her husband with whom she earlier had differences or she has willingly parted company and is living happily on her own or has married someone else on the earlier marriage having been dissolved by divorce on consent of parties or fails to support the prosecution on some other similar grounds. In such eventuality, there would almost be no chance of conviction. Would it then be proper to decline to exercise power of quashing on the ground that it would be permitting the parties to compound non- compoundable offences? The answer clearly has to be in the “negative”. It would, however, be a different matter if the High Court on facts declines Judgment 6 J-APL No.1486.2026.odt the prayer for quashing for any valid reasons including lack of bona fides.” 6. In view of the above, a case is made out for exercising the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to quash the FIR. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order : (i) The criminal application is allowed. (ii) FIR No.458/2024, dated 16.09.2024, registered with Police Station, Bhadravati, District Chandrapur for the offence punishable under Sections 85 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, consequent chargesheet No.110/2025, dated 02.07.2025 and Regular Criminal Case No.128/2025, pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhadravati, District Chandrapur, against the applicants are hereby quashed and set aside. (iii) The applicants shall deposit costs of Rs.6,000/- (Rs. Six thousand only) to the account of “Public Welfare Fund” in Union Bank of India, High Court Branch, Nagpur having account No.129712010001014 and IFSC Code UBIN0812978, within two weeks from the date of this order. 7. Rule is made absolute in the abovesaid terms. (M.W. CHANDWANI, J.) Kirtak