Sushant Arjun Admane And ANR v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 208 OF 2025 Sushant Arjun Admane and Others.

...Applicants.

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Another.

...Respondents.

------ Misbaah Amin Solkar and Mr. Parvez Sanadi and Sejal Jain for Applicants. S. H. Yadav, APP for the Respondent-State.

Mehbub Banadar, Altaf Mujawar and Devanshish Bohara for Respondent No. 2. ------ Coram : M. S. Karnik & Sharmila U. Deshmukh, JJ.

Date : September 10, 2025.

P. C. :

1.

As now the charge-sheet has been iled, learned Counsel for Applicants seeks leave to amend the prayer clauses. Leave granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

2.

By this application iled under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Applicants are seeking to quash the First Information Report bearing C.R. No. 294 of 2024 registered with MIDC Sangli Police Station and consequential charge-sheet dated 10th March 2025. The FIR came to be registered at the instance of Respondent No. 2-wife for ofence punishable under Sections 506, 504, 498A, 34 and 323 of the IPC against Applicant No.1-husband and Applicant Nos.2 1 of

and 3- the in-laws.

3.

The marriage between Applicant no.1 and the Respondent No. 2 was an arranged marriage, solemnized on 13th May 2021 as per Christian customs and traditions. Two issues are borne out of the wedlock.

4.

Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 submits that as a result of misunderstanding, FIR came to be registered, however, the parties have now settled their disputes.

5.

Learned Counsel for the applicants and the Respondent Nos. 2 have placed on record the consent terms duly signed by the applicants and the Respondent No.2 as well as their respective advocates. Applicants are personally present in Court, who are identiied by their advocate. Respondent No.2 is also present in Court and identiied by the Advocate for Respondent No.2. Learned Counsel submit that parties have signed the consent terms in their presence. Consent terms are taken on record and marked "X" for identiication. 6.

Since the parties have amicably resolved the disputes and have decided to move on in life and are residing together, no purpose will be served by continuing the criminal prosecution against them any further. The possibility of conviction in such circumstances is bleak and remote and therefore continuation of criminal proceedings against Applicants will be nothing but abuse of the process of Court. 2 of

7.

At this place, useful reference can be made to the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Another1 and Narinder Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab & Another2 where it has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the inherent power of the High Court is required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process of the court. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held that, the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable ofences in view of compromise/ settlement arrived at between the ofender and the victim, where the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim.

8.

Application is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.] [M. S. Karnik, J.] (2012) 10 SCC 303 (2014) 6 SCC 466 3 of