Ansh Vijay Tutlani v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

Digitally signed by LAXMIKANT GOPAL CHANDAN Date:

2026.04.16 15:24:07 +0530 LAXMIKANT GOPAL CHANDAN lgc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1435 OF 2026 Ansh Vijay Tutlani : Petitioner.

Versus.

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

: Respondents.

----- Mr. Aniket Vagal a/w Adv. Savvy Kolhekar and Juhi Kadu for the Petitioner.

Mrs. Rajeshree Newton, APP for the Respondent/State. Mr. Pradip Rajput for the Respondent No.2.

PSI Paresh Gargade (Pairavi Officer) of Versova Police Station present.

------- CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

DATED : 10 APRIL 2026 PC:- lgc 1.

Heard Mr. Aniket Vagal, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, Mrs Rajeshree Newton, learned APP for the Respondent/State and Mr. Pradip Rajput, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2.

2.

This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is filed by the Petitioner for quashing the FIR bearing No. 1056 of 2025 (impugned FIR) registered at Versova Police Station, Mumbai.

3.

Mr. Aniket Vagal, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. Pradip Rajput, learned Advocate for the Respondent No.2, submit that the Petitioner, a 26-year-old aspiring actor and the Respondent No.2, an aspiring actress, were friends who later developed a consensual physical relationship. They submit that the relationship commenced in 2025. They submit that a misunderstanding between them led to physical altercations. They submit that these altercations prompted the Respondent No.2 to file a complaint before the Respondent No.1, resulting in the registration of the impugned FIR. They submit that the Petitioner and the Respondent No.2 have now reconciled their differences, reestablished their friendship and wish to part ways and settle into the careers they have chosen.

They further submit that, as the dispute has been amicably resolved, the Respondent No.2 does not wish to continue with the case against the Petitioner and has given her no objection, by way of an Affidavit dated 02 April 2026, to the quashing of the impugned FIR. They, therefore, request the quashing of the impugned FIR.

4.

The Petitioner is present in the Court and is identified by his Advocate, Mr. Aniket Vagal. He tenders a photostat copy of the Petitioner's identity card, which is taken on record and marked as "X" for identification.

5.

Respondent No.2 is present in the Court and is identified by her Advocate Mr. Pradip Rajput. He tenders the

Photostat copy of Respondent No.2's Identity Card which is taken on record and marked as "X-1" for identification. 6.

Mr. Pradip Rajput states that the Affidavit dated 02 April 2026 affirmed by Respondent No.2 before the Notary Bidhu Panicker, Nerul (W), Navi Mumbai is placed on record, the same is marked as "X-2" for identification.

7.

Respondent No. 2 states that the said Affidavit (X-2) is filed voluntarily, out of her own free will and without any pressure or coercion from any person. She states that the contents of the Affidavit (X-2) are as per her say. She states that she was in a relationship with the Petitioner. She states that she is a professional pursuing a career in acting in Mumbai and intends to focus on establishing a stable, peaceful, and professional life. She states that the criminal proceedings have resulted in suffering and inconvenience, which are disturbing her career. She states that the criminal proceedings are hindering her career and that she is being viewed with awe due to the pending proceedings. She states that she and the Petitioner, after a thoughtful process, have amicably resolved their dispute and have no ill will toward each other. Respondent No. 2 states that she is not interested in continuing the criminal proceedings and wishes to bring them to an end. She reiterates her no objection to the quashing of the criminal proceedings and prays for the quashing of the impugned FIR.

8.

Mrs. Rajeshree Newton, learned APP for the Respondent/State, submits that the personal dispute, arising out of a love affair between Respondent No.2 and the Petitioner, having been amicably resolved, she has no objection to the quashing of the impugned FIR. However, she insists on imposing costs on the Petitioner as well as on Respondent No. 2 for dragging their personal matter before the police.

9.

Mr. Aniket Vagal, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. Pradip Rajput, learned Advocate for the Respondent No.2, on instructions submit that appropriate costs would be paid.

10.

Considering the facts mentioned above and the statements made by the Advocates appearing for the Petitioner and the Respondent No. 2, it appears that the Petitioner and the Respondent No. 2 were in a love relationship that soured at a certain point, resulting in the dispute between them. The allegations made by the Respondent No. 2 against the Petitioner appear to be out of anger against the Petitioner. Further, the Respondent No. 2 has stated before this Court that the matter has been settled with the Petitioner and that she does not intend to pursue the criminal case against the Petitioner. Both parties have already suffered as a result of the criminal proceedings, accordingly, it would be in their interests to quash them. The Respondent No. 2, in her Affidavit (X-2), has stated her no objection to the

quashing of the impugned FIR, as such, no useful purpose will be served by allowing the criminal prosecution to continue. Having regard to the pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab1, Narinder Singh and Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr2 and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai vs The State Of Gujarat3, there is no impediment in allowing this Writ Petition. 11.

In view of the above, Criminal Writ Petition No.1435 of 2026 is allowed in terms of the prayer clause (a), subject to the Petitioner paying Rs. 50,000/- and the Respondent No.2 paying Rs. 25,000/- as costs. Payment of costs is a condition precedent. Consequently, the impugned FIR is quashed. 12.

The Petitioner and the Respondent No.2 shall deposit their respective costs in the below-mentioned Account within a period of three weeks from today and file in the Registry of this Court the compliance affidavit along with the proof of deposit on or before 04 May 2026.

a] The Petitioner shall deposit the amount of Rs. 50,000/- in :- High Court Law Library Bank : State Bank of India Branch : Mumbai Main Branch Account No.: 10996686636 IFS Code : SBIN0000300 b] The Respondent No.2 shall deposit the amount of Rs.25,000/- in:- 2012 10 SCC 303 2014 6 SCC 466 2017 9 SCC 641

AAWI Generation Next Account No: 000110110007807 Bank : Bank of India Branch : Branch Mumbai Main Branch IFSC Code: BKID0000001 13.

The Criminal Writ Petition No.1435 of 2026 is disposed of.

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)