Ashok Fakirrao Ban And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2026:BHC-AUG:9096-DB (1) 956-appln-699-2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.699 OF 2025 ASHOK FAKIRRAO BAN AND OTHERS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...

Mr. Hemand U. Dhage, Advocate for the Applicants. Mrs. A. S. Mantri, AGP for Respondent-State.

Mr. S. A. Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.2. ...

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.

DATED : 27th FEBRUARY, 2026.

P.C.:- 1.

The present application is filed for quashment of FIR No.580/2018 registered with Rahuri Police Station, Ahmednagar for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and consequential proceeding in Regular Criminal Case No.16/2019 pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class at Rahuri.

2.

On 27.02.2026 learned Advocate appearing for applicants and respondent no.2 submitted before this Court that parties have arrived at amicable settlement and tendered joint affidavit of such terms of compromise. Accordingly, parties were relegated to Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. The applicants and respondent no.2 presented themselves before Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. The respondent no.2 accepted contents of joint affidavit and submitted that she has no objection to allow application, as dispute

(2) 956-appln-699-2025.odt has been amicably settled. The terms of settlement is taken on record and marked as Exhibit 'X' for identification. 3.

Considering nature of dispute, if parties have amicably settled the same on intervention of relatives, there is no reason to direct them with criminal proceeding. In case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Ors.1, Supreme Court has laid down guidelines for exercising inherent powers in cases where offence is not compoundable under Section 320 of Criminal Procedure Code. The present case fairly fit within guidelines laid down by Supreme Court, as dispute is matrimonial and personal in nature. 4.

In result, Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer Clause (B).

(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE Devendra/February-2026 (2014) 6 SCC 466.