Nitin Jiyalal Rajak & ors. vs State of Maharashtra - Criminal Writ Petition

## Unlock Advanced Research with PRISM AI

• Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc -... Upgrade to Premium [Cites 6, Cited by 0 ] ### Bombay High Court

Nitin Jiyalal Rajak And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 18 March, 2026

Digitally
2026:BHC-AS:13516-DB
signed by
LAXMIKANT
LAXMIKANT GOPAL (920) WP-2426.23.DOCX
GOPAL CHANDAN
CHANDAN Date:
2026.03.18
21:30:46
+0530 lgc

                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2426 OF 2023

                      Nitin Jiyalal Rajak & ors.          : Petitioners.
                            Versus
                      State of Maharashtra and anr.       : Respondents.
                      ______________________________________________________

                      Ms. Aafreen Shaikh i/by Adv. Shivam Srivastav for the
                      Applicants.
                      Mrs. P. P. Bhosale, APP for the Respondent/State.
                      Mr. Rakesh D Ghatekari i/by Adv. Pipli Datta for the
                      Respondent No.2.
                      PSI Shivaji Bhoge, PSI Sunil Parab, Shivaji Park Police Station
                      present.
                      ______________________________________________________

                                                    CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATED : 18 MARCH 2026
                      PC:-

1.  By the order passed today i.e. 18 March 2026 in Interim
   

   Application No.920 of 2026, the present Writ Petition is
   restored to file.

2.  Not on board. Upon mentioning by Ms. Aafreen Shaikh,
   

   learned Advocate for the Petitioners, the same is taken on
   board.

3.  At the outset, Ms. Aafreen Shaikh, learned Advocate for
   

   the Petitioners, requests to amend the memo of Petition by 1::: Uploaded on - 18/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 19/03/2026 20:35:16 ::: (920) WP-2426.23.DOCX

adding a prayer clause in respect of quashing of the charge-
sheet. The request made by Ms. Aafreen Shaikh is not opposed
by Ms. P P Bhosale, learned APP for the Respondent/State and
Mr. Rakesh Ghatekari, learned Advocate for the Respondent
No.2.

1.  In view of no objection, leave to amend is granted.
   

   Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

2.  Heard Ms. Aafreen Shaikh, learned Advocate for the
   

   Petitioners, Mrs. P P Bhosale, learned APP for the
   Respondent/State and Mr. Rakesh Ghatekari, learned
   Advocate for Respondent No.2.

3.  This Petition under [Article 226](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1712542/) of the Constitution of
   

   India and under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha
   Sanhita, 2023 is preferred by the Petitioners for quashing the
   FIR bearing No.48 of 2023 (impugned FIR) registered with
   the Shivaji Park Police Station, Dadar, Mumbai for the
   offences punishable under Section 323, 498A, 406, 504 r/w
   34 of the Indian Penal Code, and the charge-sheet bearing
   Police Case No.1660 of 2023 pending before the Court of
   Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhoiwada.

4.  Petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are present in Court and
   

   Petitioner No.4 appears through V.C. They are identified by
   their Advocate Ms Aafreen Shaikh. She tenders the Photostat
   copy of the Petitioners' Identity Cards, which are taken on
   record and marked as "X-Colly" for identification.

2::: Uploaded on - 18/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 19/03/2026 20:35:16 ::: (920) WP-2426.23.DOCX

1.  Respondent No.2 is present in the Court and is
   

   identified by her Advocate Mr. Rakesh Ghatekari. He tenders
   the Photostat copy of Respondent No.2's Identity Card,which
   is taken on record and marked as "X-1" for identification.

2.  Mr.Rakesh             Ghatekari,   learned     Advocate          for     the
   

   Respondent No.2, states that the Affidavit dated 18 March
   2026 affirmed by Respondent No.2 before the Notary S.N.H.
   Zaidi, Fort, Mumbai is placed on record, the same is marked
   as "X-2" for identification.

3. Respondent No. 2 states that the said Affidavit (X-2) is
   

   filed 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 reiterates her no
   objection for quashing of the criminal proceedings.

4. Ms. Aafreen Shaikh and Mr. Rakesh Ghatekari submit
   

   that the subject matter of the impugned FIR is the
   matrimonial dispute between the Petitioner No.1 (husband)
   and the Respondent No.2 (wife). They submit that the
   Petitioner No.1 and the Respondent No.2 have amicably
   resolved the matrimonial dispute. They submit that upon
   resolution of the dispute, they have decided to part ways and
   have also filed Divorce Petition bearing No. F-1136 of 2023
   seeking divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the
   Hindu Marriage Act 1955. They submit that the said Divorce
   Petition No. F-1136 of 2023 is disposed of by order dated 28
   February 2024. They submit that the Respondent No.2 has 3::: Uploaded on - 18/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 19/03/2026 20:35:16 ::: (920) WP-2426.23.DOCX

given her no objection for quashing of the impugned FIR and
the charge-sheet arising out of the impugned FIR. They rely
on paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Affidavit (X-2) which are
reproduced herein below in verbatim.

"3. That with the intervention of elders, family
members and well-wishers, the parties have amicably
settled all disputes.

1.  That a consent terms was filed in Family Court
   

   of Bandra pursuant to successful settlement in Divorce
   petition no. F 1136 of 2023, filed by Petitioner no. 01
   and Respondent no. 2, to dissolve the marriage by
   Mutual Consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu
   Marriage Act, 1955.

2.  The said petition was disposed of and the
   

   marriage was dissolved on 28.02.2024 subject to the
   alimony amount of Rs. 200,000 (Rupees Two lakhs
   only) being deposited vide DD No. 081849 dated
   28.02.2024 drawn on HDFC Bank with Principal Judge,
   Family Court of Mumbai. The condition was that once
   the quashing order was obtained with the consent of
   myself, the Respondent No. 2, I could apply for the
   deposited alimony amount of Rs. 200,000 (Rupees Two
   lakhs only) to be reimbursed to me.

3. That all issues relating to:

Stridhan
Permanent alimony / maintenance
Return of articles
Past, present and future claims have been fully
settled between the parties.
7. That the settlement has been arrived at
voluntarily, without any pressure, threat, coercion or
undue influence from any side.

They therefore submits that the impugned FIR and the charge-
sheet arising out of the impugned FIR be quashed.

4::: Uploaded on - 18/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 19/03/2026 20:35:16 ::: (920) WP-2426.23.DOCX

1. Mrs. P P Bhosale, learned APP for the Respondent/State
   

   submits that in view of the settlement between the Petitioners
   and Respondent No.2, the Petitioner No.1 and the Respondent
   No.2 being separated by divorce and no objection given by
   Respondent No.2 in her Affidavit (x-2), she has no objection
   for quashing of the criminal proceedings. She however insists
   for imposition of costs on the Petitioners and Respondent
   No.2.

2. Considering the matrimonial dispute between the
   

   Petitioners and the Respondent No.2 being resolved in Divorce
   Petition No.F-1136 of 2023, the Respondent No.2 having filed
   the Affidavit (X-2) giving no objection for quashing of the
   impugned FIR and the charge-sheet arising out of it, no
   purpose would be served in continuing the criminal
   proceedings. Having regards to the pronouncements of the
   Hon'ble Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs State Of
   Punjab1, Narinder Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr 2
   and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai vs The State Of Gujarat 3,
   there is no impediment in allowing this Writ Petition.

3. In view of the above, Criminal Writ Petition No.2426 OF
   

   2023 is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (a-1)
   subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- by the Petitioners
   and Rs.10,000/- by the Respondent No.2. Payment of costs is
   a condition precedent. Consequently, the impugned FIR and 1 2012 10 SCC 303 2 2014 6 SCC 466 3 2017 9 SCC 641 5::: Uploaded on - 18/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 19/03/2026 20:35:16 ::: (920) WP-2426.23.DOCX

the Charge-sheet arising out of the impugned FIR are
quashed.

1. The Petitioners and the Respondent No.2 shall deposit their respective costs in the below mentioned Account within a period of two weeks from today and file in the Registry of this Court the compliance affidavit along with the proof of deposit on or before 06 April 2026 :-

Account Name : BCMG's Advocate Academy& Research
Center
Account Number : 000120110001327
Bank Name : Bank of India
Brach Name : Mumbai Main Branch
IFS Code : BKID000001
Type of Account : Current Account
16. The Criminal Writ Petition No.2426 of 2026 is disposed
of.

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) 6::: Uploaded on - 18/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 19/03/2026 20:35:16 :::