Ganesh Jagannath Dhonde v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2026:BHC-AUG:3990-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 984 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3016 OF 2025 Ganesh Jagannath Dhonde, Age-35 years, Occupation-Business, R/o. Shiral Road, Ashti, Tq.Ashti, Dist.Beed.
[Husband of informant] Applicant.
Versus
1.
The State of Maharashtra Through Officer In-charge, Police Station Ashti, Dist.Beed 2.
Manisha Ganesh Dhonde, Age-32 years, Occupation-Household, R/o. Shiral Road, Ashti, Tq. Ashti, Dist.Beed.
RESPONDENTS (Res. No.2/Org.Informant) ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. S.E. Shekade APP for Respondents : Mrs A.S. Mantri Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. P.A.Dhakne h/f R.G. Narwade ...
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
Dated : January 29, 2026 FINAL ORDER :- 1.
Present application is filed invoking inherent powers of this Court for quashment of the FIR No.301 of 2025 dated 23.6.2025 registered with police Station Ashti, District Beed for the offence punishable under section 85, 82, 351(2), 351(3), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2.
On 14.8.2025 when this Matter was heard, learned advocates appearing for applicant and respondent no.2 jointly submitted that parties have amicably settled the dispute and wants to file on record Terms of settlement. Accordingly, they were relegated to the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court for verification of settlement terms. Accordingly, parties presented themselves before the Registrar (Judicial), who forwarded his report dated 25.8.2025. It states that terms of settlement are signed by respondent no.2/informant. She was identified by her advocate. She has filed on record self attested photo copies of the Aadhar Card. They voluntarily entered into the compromise. Perusal of terms of settlement shows that applicant has transferred 52R land situated at Ashti in the name of respondent no.2 informant. Respondent no.2 is personally present before the Court and states that applicant has executed registered sale-deed in respect of 52R land and she has no objection to quash the FIR and consequential proceeding.
3.
Perusal of the FIR shows that general allegations were made against the applicant. Now, parties have amicably and genuinely settled the dispute. In light of the aforesaid factual
background and legal position as espoused by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2014) SCC 466 case is made out to exercise inherent powers. Pertinently, in light of the settlement between the parties, further prosecution would be futile exercise and wastage of judicial time. 4.
In the result, application is allowed in terms of prayer clause 'B' and 'C' and disposed of.
( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. ) ...
AAA/-