Junaid Adil Khan And ORS. v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR.

1 / 3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.4920 OF 2025 Junaid Adil Khan & Ors.

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

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

• Ms. Shreya Shrivastava, Advocate for Petitioners. • Ms. Sangeeta D. Shinde, APP for the State/Respondent. • Mr. Arun Rajput a/w Mushtaq Shaikh, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

CORAM

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

DATE : 08th OCTOBER, 2025 P.C. :

1.

This Petition is filed for quashing of the FIR registered vide C.R. No.811/2024 at Malwani Police Station on 07/06/2024 by the Respondent No.2 u/s 323, 406, 498-A, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Petitioner No.1 is the husband of the first informant. The Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are his parents and the Petitioner No.4 is his sister. The matter is Digitally signed by MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date:

2025.10.13 13:16:39 +0530 MANUSHREE NESARIKAR settled between the parties and therefore, it is not necessary to refer to the allegations in detail.

Nesarikar

2 / 3 2.

Heard Ms. Shreya Shrivastava, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Mr. Arun Rajput, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 and Ms. Sangeeta D. Shinde, learned APP for the State. 3.

Briefly stated, the allegations made by the Respondent No.2 are that she got married with the Petitioner No.1 on 17/11/2023. The entire expenses were borne by the Respondent No.2's father. Her father had paid dowry to the Petitioners. He had given ornaments to the informant and also to her husband i.e. the Petitioner No.1. The FIR thereafter goes on to mention different instances when she was ill-treated. The Petitioner No.1 used to harass her under influence of some intoxicating substance. The other Petitioners never supported her and instead instigated the Petitioner No.1. They had removed Rs.4 lakhs from the informant's bank account. She found that the Petitioner No.1 was in touch with the other persons with bad character. There are allegations that the Petitioner No.2 had outraged her modesty. On one occasion, she was locked in the house and then she was driven out of the house. On these allegations, the FIR is lodged.

3 / 3 4.

Now the matter is settled between the parties. The Respondent No.2 has filed her affidavit giving her no objection for quashing of these proceedings. She is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned counsel. She informed the Court that she has no objection for quashing of these proceedings. The matter is settled between the parties.

5.

Considering this situation, in the interest of justice and in the interest of parties, we are inclined to allow this Petition. 6.

Hence, the following order :

O R D E R

(i) The FIR vide C.R. No.811/2024 dated 07/06/2024 registered at Malwani Police Station and the further proceedings arising out of the said FIR, are quashed and set aside.

(ii) The Petition is disposed of.

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