Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1332 (BOM)

Naresh Rama Ahire v. State of Maharashtra

2025-11-21

GAUTAM A.ANKHAD, SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

body2025
JUDGMENT : GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing of FIR no.4 of 2025 dated 2 nd January 2025. 2. An FIR was registered with the Kharghar police station, at the instance of the respondent no. 2 for the offences punishable under sections 318(4), 316(2), read with Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Subsequent to the FIR, the petitioner approached the learned Sessions Judge for District Raigad, At Panvel for grant of Anticipatory Bail vide Criminal Bail Application No.26 of 2025, which was rejected. Being aggrieved, the petitioner moved to the Hon’ble High Court for grant of Anticipatory Bail vide Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 521 of 2025, which is still pending. The allegations in the FIR pertain to a loan arrangement between the petitioner and the respondent no. 2. The dispute between the petitioner and the the respondent no. 2 is now amicably settled. 3. Mr Parmar, the learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 has also tendered an affidavit dated 21 st November 2025 which records that the respondent no. 2 has no objection to quashing of the said FIR. The parties are present in the Court and identified by their respective counsel. The parties have affixed their signatures and recorded their appearance in their own handwriting which shall form part of the proceedings. A copy of Aadhaar card of the respondent no. 2 is also taken on record. In terms of clause no.5 of the consent affidavit dated 21 st November 2025, the Respondent No.2 is permitted to withdraw an amount deposited by the Petitioner subject to costs and charges. Clause 5 of the Affidavit reads as follows : “I say that the amount of 39 Lakhs as deposited by the Petitioner with the Registry of this Hon’ble Court in terms of the order dated 3rd March 2025 and subsequent extension of the order, the Respondent No. 2/ Complainant i.e. myself be allowed to be withdraw the amount so deposited as has been agreed by the petitioner herein for quashing C.R. No. I-4 of 2025 in the interest of justice.” 4. In “Gian Singh v. State of Punjab”, (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 160, the Hon’ble Supreme Court clarified that the high court may exercise its inherent powers where disputes are private or allegations involved are civil in nature to serve ends of justice and prevent abuse of process of law. The parties have amicably resolved their differences the continuation of the proceedings would not serve any purpose. Writ Petition (Stamp) No.20519 of 2025 is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) which reads as follows: “(b) That this Hon’ble Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 be pleased to quash and set aside F.I.R. No.I-4 of 2025 registered with the Kharghar Police Station under sections 318(4), 316(2) read with section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding section 420, 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code).”