Rehan Ali Irfan Ali Pradhan And ANR v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

1 / 4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.4396 OF 2025 Rehan Ali Irfan Ali Pradhan & Ors.

.... Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

.... Respondents .......

• Mr. Nadeem M. S. Shaikh a/w Nikita Hivarale, Advocate for Petitioners.

• Ms. Supriya Kak, APP for the State/Respondent. • Mr. Parvez Inamdar, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

CORAM

: SARANG V. KOTWAL & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.

DATE : 12th SEPTEMBER, 2025 P.C. :

1.

The present Petition is filed for quashing and setting aside the FIR bearing No.684/2025, dated 27/04/2025, registered with Mumbra Police Station, for the offences punishable u/s 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, against the Petitioners. Digitally signed by MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date:

2025.09.16 15:22:06 +0530 MANUSHREE NESARIKAR 2.

Heard Mr. Nadeem M. S. Shaikh, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Mr. Parvez Inamdar, learned counsel for the Nesarikar

2 / 4 Respondent No.2 and Ms. Supriya Kak, learned APP for the State.

3.

The said FIR came to be registered on the report filed by the Respondent No.2. The Petitioner No.1 is the husband of Respondent No.2. The Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of the Petitioner No.1. After filing of the report, the parties entered into an amicable settlement and therefore, the Respondent No.2 has no objection to quash the present FIR.

4.

In view thereof, it is not necessary to state in detail the exact allegations levelled against the Petitioner in the said report. Briefly, the allegations are that after the marriage of the Respondent No.2 she started cohabiting with the family of the Petitioners. However, within a short time, after the marriage, the Petitioners subjected the Respondent No.2 to cruelty on account of lesser dowry. The husband and in-laws of the Respondent No.2 used to taunt her. The Petitioner No.1 used to assault the Respondent No.2. There are other instances of the cruelty stated in the report.

3 / 4 5.

Be that as it may. Now the parties have amicably settled the dispute between them. The Respondent No.2 is cohabiting with the Petitioners. The Respondent No.2 has no objection to quash the FIR. In view thereof, the Respondent No.2 has filed her affidavit. Therein she has given no objection to quash the FIR. The Respondent No.2 is present through VC and she reiterates the contents of the affidavit. The Respondent No.2 is identified by her Advocate Mr. Parvez Inamdar. She states that she is residing with the Petitioner No.1 along with their children. 6.

In view thereof, the present Petition is allowed to be quashed in the interest the parties and in the interest of justice. 7.

Hence, the following order :

O R D E R

(i) The Petition is allowed.

(ii) The FIR bearing No.684/2025, dated

4 / 4 27/04/2025, registered with Mumbra Police Station and the further proceedings arising out of the said FIR, are quashed and set aside.

(iii) The Petition is disposed of.

(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)