Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7925 (BOM)

PRAVIN DINKAR KHEDKAR AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLN/1720/2026 · 2026-09-07

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 68appln1720.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 68 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1720 OF 2026 PRAVIN DINKAR KHEDKAR AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ... Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Andhale Sandip Ramnath APP for Respondents/State : Mr. S.V.Hange Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Ms. Gurvinder J. Punjabi (appointed) … CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. DATE : 07.09.2026 PER COURT : 1. The learned Advocate Mr. Ashish R. Kachole, who was appointed by this Court, stands discharged, in the light of the learned Advocate Mr. Gurvinder J. Punjabi, who is filing her Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No. 2. 2. As the learned appointed Advocate Mr. Ashish R. Kachole, was appointed for one date before this Court, is entitled for remuneration for the appearance and it be paid to the learned Advocate by the High Court Legal Aid Services, Sub Committee, Aurangabad. 3. The learned Advocate for the applicant and the learned Advocate appearing for respondent No. 2, jointly submit that the parties have settled their dispute amicably amongst themselves and have also entered into the compromise terms, which have been placed on record 2 68appln1720.26 dated 27.08.2026. 4. The record indicates that the parties have appeared before the Registrar (Judicial) and the report to that effect is placed on record, which indicates that applicant No. 1, who is husband and respondent No. 2 who is wife, have admitted and accepted the contents of the compromise terms and they voluntarily submit that they have entered into the compromise terms and there is no force, which has been applied to them. 5. Taking into consideration the fact that that the offences alleged pertains to matrimonial dispute, between the applicant and respondent No. 2 and now they have settled their dispute amongst themselves, hence, the present proceeding can be quashed. 6. In the aforesaid circumstances, the Criminal Application No. 1720 of 2026 stands allowed. Hence the following order : ORDER (i) The application stands allowed in terms of prayer Clause (B). (ii) The First Information Report bearing No. 540 of 2025, dated 26.11.2025, registered at Ashti Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 115(2), 3 68appln1720.26 352, 351(2) r/w 3 (5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, stands quashed and set aside, against the present applicants. (iii) No order as to the costs. (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.) mahajansb/