Gitalaxmi v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 528
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 34
Key paragraphs
- Para 1010. Criminal Writ Petition No. 205 of 2026 is disposed of. No order as to costs. [ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.] GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR
Judgment
Mr. Zoheb Merchant, learned Advocate for the Petitioners. Petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 are present in the Court. Mr. Tanveer G. Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent. Mr. Galib Shaikh, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 2 is present in the Court. PSI Mr. M. T. Sable attached to Tulinj Police Station, District-Palghar is present in the Court. __________ CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 23rd JANUARY 2026. P.C. :
Heard Mr. Zoheb Merchant, learned Advocate for the Petitioners, Mr. Tanveer Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent and Mr. Galib Shaikh, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
This Petition is preferred by the Petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of the First Information Report bearing No. 169 of 2020 dated 13.02.2020 registered with Tulinj Police Station, District-Palghar for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 504 & 506 read with Gitalaxmi Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the criminal proceedings bearing R.C.C. No. 1097 of 2022 (Charge-sheet No. 580 of 2021), pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Joint Civil Judge at Vasai, arising out of the said FIR.
Mr. Zoheb Merchant, learned Advocate for the Petitioners states that Petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 are present in the Court. Mr. Galib Shaikh, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2 states that Respondent No. 2 is present in the Court. Photostat copies of Aadhar Cards of all the Petitioners and Respondent No. 2 as photo identity proof, duly certified by Mr. Zoheb Merchant and Mr. Galib Shaikh, are tendered by the respective Advocates. Same are taken on record and marked as “X Colly.” for identification.
Mr. Zoheb Merchant and Mr. Galib Shaikh jointly state that the matrimonial dispute between Petitioner No. 1 (Husband) and Respondent No. 2 (Wife) is amicably resolved, as such Respondent No. 2 has No Objection for quashing of the criminal proceedings. They therefore state that no purpose would be served in continuing the criminal proceedings and the same be quashed.
Mr. Galib Shaikh, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2 tenders Affidavit dated 23.01.2026 affirmed by Respondent No. 2 before the Notary Advocate S. N. Dhange at Mumbai on
21.01.2026. Same is taken on record and marked as “X-1” for identification. Respondent No. 2, who is present in the Court states that the said Affidavit (X-1) has been filed by her out of her own free will and without any pressure, force or coercion from any person. She states that the contents of Affidavit (X-1) are as per Gitalaxmi her say. She by relying on paragraph nos. 3 to 7 of the Affidavit (X- 1) and submits that she has No Objection for quashing of the FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings.
Petitioner Nos. 1 to 4, who are present in the Court state that the matrimonial discord of Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 is amicably resolved.
Mr. Tanveer G. Khan, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent states that no purpose would be served by continuing with the criminal proceedings in view of the statements made by Respondent No. 2 before this Court, as also her statements in the Affidavit (X-1). He therefore submits that the impugned FIR and the criminal proceedings can be quashed.
Having regards to the facts as placed before me, the nature of dispute, the amicable settlement arrived between the parties, the statements made on oath by Respondent No. 2 (Affidavit dated
23.01.2026 at X-1) and having regards to the judicial pronouncements by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh v/s. The State of Punjab and Another1, Narinder Singh and Others v/s. State of Punjab and Another2 and Parbatbhai Aahir Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinbhai Karmur and Others Vs. State of Gujarat and Anr.3, to secure ends of justice I deem it fit and proper to exercise powers under Section 528 of the BNSS to quash the criminal proceedings.
1. (2012)10 Supreme Court Cases 303. 2. (2014)6 Supreme Court Cases 466. 3 (2017) 9 SCC 641. Gitalaxmi
In view of the above, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). Consequently, the FIR bearing No. 169 of 2020 dated
13.02.2020 registered with Tulinj Police Station, District-Palghar for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 504 & 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the subsequent criminal proceedings bearing R.C.C. No. 1097 of 2022 (Charge- sheet No. 580 of 2021), pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Joint Civil Judge at Vasai, arising out of the said FIR, are quashed. Criminal proceedings against the Petitioners arising out of the impugned FIR and the charge-sheet are closed.
Criminal Writ Petition No. 205 of 2026 is disposed of. No order as to costs. [ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.] GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 23 Jan 2026. The bench was ASHWIN D BHOBE.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.