Shakil Ahmed Mohammed Ahmad v. State Of Maha Thr Pso, Ps Gittikhadan Nagpur
2026:BHC-NAG:3473-DB 1 62.APL.1997-2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1997 OF 2025 ( Shakil Ahmed S/o Mohammed Ahmad & Ors.
Vs.
State of Maharashtra, Thr. Police Station, Gittikhadan, Nagpur & Anr. ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. Inamul Haque, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. Neeraj Jawade, APP for the Non-applicant No.1/State. Mr. Pradeep Gautami, Advocate for the Non-applicant No.2. CORAM: URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED : 26th FEBRUARY, 2026 1.
The present Application is preferred by the Applicants for quashing of the FIR in connection with Crime No.296/2025 registered with Police Station, Gittikhadan, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 352, 351(2), 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 3, 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 and the consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing R.C.C. No.2231/2025.
2.
During the pendency of this Application, both the parties arrived at a settlement and they have decided to reside together. The affidavit is placed on record and the contents of the affidavit are verified from the Non-applicant No.2 as well as the Applicant No.1 and they have agreed and accepted the
2 62.APL.1997-2025.odt terms and conditions of the said affidavit.
3.
At this stage, the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, wherein the Court observed that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled, although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored, securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. In this regard, a specific reference was made to offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc.
or a family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim but the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable. The High Court may, within the framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated.
4.
In view of the above observations, the Application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order.
3 62.APL.1997-2025.odt
O R D E R
i.
The Application is allowed.
ii.
The First Information Report bearing Crime No. 296/2025 registered with Police Station, Gittikhadan, Nagpur for the offence punishable under Sections 85, 352, 351(2), 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 3, 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 and the consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing R.C.C.
No.2231/2025 are hereby quashed and set aside to the extent of the present Applicants.
5.
Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) SD. Bhimte Signed by: Mr.S.D.Bhimte Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 27/02/2026 15:44:35