Salim Kamruddin Khan v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.5586 OF 2025 Salim Kamruddin Khan, C/o. Larsen & Toubro Ltd.
] .. Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra, ] Through Narpoli Police Station, Bhiwandi ]
2. Jugeshkumar Shivprakash Pandey, ] R/o. Kopar Gaon, Bhiwandi, Dist. Thane ] .. Respondents Smt. Palak M. Shah, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs. M.M. Deshmukh, In-Charge Public Prosecutor with Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1.
Mr. Vinay M. Choudhary, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM : SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ. & GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
DATE : 21ST NOVEMBER 2025.
PER, GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
The present Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 and section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeks following reliefs:
"a. That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the entire proceeding/final report/charge-sheet against the present petitioners arising out of F.I.R. No.0531 of 2025 dated 09/04/2025 at the instance of Narpoli Police Station, Bhiwandi, District-Thane for the offences punishable under section 106 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Regular Criminal Case bearing No.1524 of 2025 on the terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of the case."
2.
The FIR No.531 of 2025 was lodged at the instance of the respondent no.2 at Narpoli police station on 9th April 2025. Pursuant to the same, the proceedings bearing RCC No.1524 of 1/2 24-WP-5586-2025.doc Dixit
2025 are pending. The charge-sheet has been filed in the said proceedings on 3rd September 2025.
3.
The differences between the parties have now been settled amicably. Mr. Choudhary, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2, has tendered an affidavit dated 23rd September 2025 across the bar which records that the respondent no.2 has settled his differences with the petitioner and has no objection to quashing of the said FIR. The affidavit is taken on record and attached at appropriate place. The parties are present in the Court and identified by their respective counsel. The parties have affixed their signatures and recorded their appearance in their own handwriting which shall now form part of the record. We have personally inquired from the respondent no.2, who re-confirms his consent to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. 4.
It is well settled principle of law, as reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Naushey Ali v. State of U.P." (2025) 4 SCC 78 the inherent power of this Court is distinct from the power to compound offences and thus, even cases where noncompoundable offences are involved can be quashed under the inherent powers of the Court when the ends of justice justify such exercise of power. Considering that the parties have settled their differences and the respondent no.2 is no longer inclined to support the prosecution, the continuance of the criminal proceedings would not serve any fruitful purpose. Thus, Writ Petition No.5586 of 2025 is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
[ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ] [ CHIEF JUSTICE ] Digitally signed by SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT Date:
2025.11.29 10:24:03 +0530 2/2 24-WP-5586-2025.doc Dixit SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT