[Cites 15, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Vishwanath Tamma Mhamane vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 21 May, 2026
2026:BHC-KOL:3831
4-APL-99-2026 (CR) .doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 99 OF 2026
Vishwanath Tamma Mhamane
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra And Anr.
...
Mr. Vaibhav R. Gaikwad, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. Shivraj V. Patil (Shirgaonkar) a/w Mr. Vikas B. Patil
(Shirgaonkar), Advocate for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Avinash A. Naik APP for the Respondent No.1-State.
...
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 21st MAY, 2026
[VACATION COURT]
P. C. :
1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing
and setting aside the first information report bearing Crime No.453
of 2024, presented by respondent No.2/ complainant, registered
with Satara City Police Station, District Satara for the offences
punishable under Sections 376, 376(1)(n), 323, 504 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, Section 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child
Marriage Act, 2006 and Sections 4, 6, 8, 12, 17 and 21 of the
Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and further
consequential proceedings arising out of said crime i.e. Special Case
Sajakali Jamadar 1 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 21/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 21/05/2026 21:20:38 :::
4-APL-99-2026 (CR) .doc
No.105 of 2025, pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Satara.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant alleges
that on 24.12.2023, the accused visited complainant's residence
under the pretext of providing educational opportunities to minor
daughter. Under these false inducements, the accused persuaded the
complainant and his wife to accompany them to Shankargaon on
the night of 21.12.2023. Subsequently, on 31.12.2023, at
approximately 1:00 p.m. in Talewasti, Kolewadi, the accused
forcibly solemnized the marriage of the minor victim with one
Sachin B. Mhamane, despite being fully aware of her minority status
and in direct violation of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. The
complainant further contends that the accused subsequently
restrained the victim, subjected her to physical abuse and
harassment, and intimidated the complainant's family with threats
of violence and death. Hence, lodged the report.
3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the dispute
arises out of family discord between close relatives and that the
parties have amicably settled the matter through intervention of
elders. It is submitted that Respondent No.2 no longer wishes to
prosecute the proceedings and is ready to place the settlement on
Sajakali Jamadar 2 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 21/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 21/05/2026 21:20:38 :::
4-APL-99-2026 (CR) .doc
record before this Court. Learned Counsel further submits that no
independent material exists to indicate active involvement of the
Applicant in the alleged incident and continuation of the
proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. It is also
submitted that the Applicant has recently been selected for
appointment in the Maharashtra Police Force and continuance of the
prosecution would seriously prejudice his future career. It is
therefore prayed that this Court may exercise its inherent
jurisdiction and quash the impugned FIR and consequential
proceedings.
4. Learned APP opposes the Application and submits that the
allegations pertain to serious offences and therefore the present case
does not warrant exercise of inherent jurisdiction of this Court for
quashing of the proceedings merely on the basis of settlement
between the parties.
5. Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 - original
complainant, however, submits that the parties have amicably
resolved the dispute and that the complainant has no objection if
the present Application is allowed. It is submitted that an affidavit
to that effect has also been filed on record.
Sajakali Jamadar 3 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 21/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 21/05/2026 21:20:38 :::
4-APL-99-2026 (CR) .doc
6. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and upon
perusal of the record, it appears that the dispute arises out of
matrimonial and family discord between close relatives. The original
complainant has filed an affidavit before this Court stating that the
matter has been amicably settled and that he has no objection for
quashing of the impugned proceedings. The record further indicates
that continuation of the prosecution would only result in prolonging
bitterness between the parties, despite restoration of cordial
relations.
7. This Court has also taken into consideration the fact that no
fruitful purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution in
the peculiar facts of the present case. The Applicant has recently
been selected for appointment in the Maharashtra Police Force and
pendency of the present proceedings is likely to cause serious
prejudice his future career prospects.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh & Others v.
State of Punjab & Another, (2014) 6 SCC 466 , in appropriate cases
involving personal or private disputes, the High Court may exercise
its inherent jurisdiction to secure the ends of justice even in respect
of non-compoundable offences, where continuation of proceedings
Sajakali Jamadar 4 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 21/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 21/05/2026 21:20:38 :::
4-APL-99-2026 (CR) .doc
would serve no useful purpose.
9. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case,
particularly the amicable settlement between the parties and the
stand of the original complainant supporting the present
Application, this Court finds that further continuation of the
proceedings would not advance the cause of justice and would
instead result in unnecessary continuation of criminal litigation
between the parties.
10. Hence, following order
ORDER
(i) The criminal application is allowed.
(ii) First Information Report (FIR) bearing Crime No.453 of 2024, presented by respondent No.2/ complainant, registered with Satara City Police Station, District Satara for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 376(1)(n), 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and Sections 4, 6, 8, 12, 17 and 21 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, stands quashed and set aside as against the present applicant i.e. Vishwanath Tamma Mhamane.
Sajakali Jamadar 5 of 6 ::: Uploaded on - 21/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 21/05/2026 21:20:38 ::: 4-APL-99-2026 (CR) .doc
(iii) Needless to state that non-compliance of aforesaid directions shall result into recall of this order without further reference to the Court.
[SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.]
Sajakali Jamadar 6 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 21/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 21/05/2026 21:20:38 :::