| |
CDJ 2025 BHC 2138
|
| Court : High Court of Judicature at Bombay |
| Case No : Criminal Application No. 1097 of 2025 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE REVATI MOHITE DERE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDESH D. PATIL |
| Parties : Sanket Satish Patil & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra, At the instance of Yeola City Police Station & Another |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Applicants: Chetan S. Damre a/w Omkar S. Banbe, Advocates. For the Respondents: Gauri S. Rao, A.P.P., R2, Vishwatej R. Jadhav, Advocate. |
| Date of Judgment : 28-11-2025 |
| Head Note :- |
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Section 118(1), Section 189(2), Section 191(2), Section 191(3), Section 190, Section 115, Section 351(2), Section 351(3), Section 352 -
Comparative Citation:
2025 BHC-AS 53867,
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.) – Sections 118(1), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115, 351(2), 351(3), 352
2. Catch Words:
- Quashing, amicable settlement, FIR
3. Summary:
The Applicants filed an application seeking quashing of FIR No. 0294/2025 registered at Yeola City Police Station for offences under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The FIR arose from an alleged assault incident on 14‑09‑2025 involving the Respondent No.2, a taxi operator. The parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement, with the Respondent No.2 affirming in an affidavit that he has no objection to the FIR being quashed and that the Applicants have apologized. The Court noted the settlement, the affidavit, and relevant Apex Court precedent, and observed no medical evidence of serious injury. Consequently, the Court found no impediment to granting the application. The FIR was ordered to be quashed and set aside. The order is absolute and parties are directed to act upon an authenticated copy.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
Oral Judgment:
Revati Mohite Dere, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties and the application is taken up for final disposal. Learned APP waives notice on behalf of the Respondent- State. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2 waives notice on behalf of the Respondent No.2.
3. By this application, the Applicants seek quashing and setting aside of the FIR registered vide C.R. No. 0294/2025 with the Yeola City Police Station, Nashik, as against the Applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115, 351(2), 351(3), 352 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred as ‘B.N.S.’). Quashing is sought on the premise, that the parties have amicably settled their dispute i.e. dispute between the Applicants and the Respondent No.2.
4. Perused the FIR. According to the Respondent No.2 (Original Complainant) he was in the business of plying taxis between Nagarsul to Shirdi. According to the Respondent No.2 the incident took place on 14.09.2025, when he was travelling from Nagarsul to Shirdi. He has stated that when he reached Yeola toll plaza at about 9:30 a.m. to 9:45 a.m., one Scorpio vehicle overtook his vehicle and prevented him from proceeding further. The Respondent No.2 has further alleged that the Applicants got down from the said Scorpio vehicle and started assaulting him with pipe and stick. Post the said incident, the aforesaid FIR was lodged by the Respondent No.2 against the Applicants alleging the aforesaid offences.
5. Post registration of the aforesaid FIR, the parties i.e. Applicants and Respondent No.2 amicably settled their dispute.
6. The Respondent No.2 has affirmed the affidavit which is annexed to the application. In the said affidavit, the Respondent No.2 has stated that the dispute has been amicably settled between them and that the Applicants have tendered an apology to him for the incident. He has further stated that he has no objection if the FIR is quashed.
7. The Respondent No.2-Gaurav Rajendra Gaikwad, is present in the Court. He reiterates what is stated in the affidavit. He is identified by his Counsel. The learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 has tendered a photocopy of the Aadhar Card of the Respondent No.2 duly attested by him. The same is taken on record.
8. Considering the amicable settlement between the parties, the nature of dispute, the affidavit of Respondent No.2 and the judgment of Apex Court, there is no impediment if the application is allowed. We may note, that no medical certificate has been produced to show that the Respondent No.2 had infact suffered any grievous/serious injuries in the incident.
9. Application is accordingly allowed and the FIR registered vide C.R. No. 294/2025 with the Yeola City Police Station, Nashik is quashed and set aside.
10. We are informed at this stage by the learned Counsel for the Applicants and the learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2. that all the Applicants are before this Court and the quashing is of the entire FIR. Statement accepted.
11. Rule made is absolute on the aforesaid terms.
12. Application is disposed of accordingly.
13. All concerned parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this Order.
|
| |
