Friday, 01, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Owais Abdul Razzak Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 4833 Bom

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 4833 Bom
Judgement Date : 17 March, 2021

Bombay High Court
Owais Abdul Razzak Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 17 March, 2021
Bench: S.S. Shinde, Manish Pitale
           Digitally
           signed by
           Vishwanath                                1/5                       13-CRWP-1073-2021.doc
Vishwanath S. Sherla
S. Sherla  Date:
           2021.03.18
           17:43:26            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
           +0530                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1073 OF 2021

            Mr. Owais Abdul Razzak Shaikh
            Age- 45, Occ- Business, Residing at
            175/193, Memni Building, Flat No. 8,
            Maulana Azad Road, Sagar Hotel,
            Nagpada,Mumbai- 400008.                                 ...PETITIONER

                     Versus

            1.       The State of Maharashtra
                     At the instance of Nagpada
                     Police Station.

            2.     Mr. Zubair Shakil Khan
                   Aged: 38, Occ: Business, Residing at
                   Room No. 01, Pujari Building, First
                   Floor, Mastan Talao, J J Marg
                   Bombay- 400008.                                  ...RESPONDENTS
                                                   ...
            Mr. Mohd. Arif Siddiqui for Petitioner
            Mr. Irfan Abdul Aziz for Respondent No. 2.
            Mr. V.B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for State.
            Respondent No. 2 is present in the Court.
                                                   ...

                                            CORAM : S. S. SHINDE &
                                                     MANISH PITALE, JJ.

                                            DATE :         17th MARCH, 2021.

            ORAL JUDGMENT [PER S.S. SHINDE]:


            .                  Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the

            consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.




            Bhagyawant Punde
                                           2/5                     13-CRWP-1073-2021.doc




2.                 Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Respondent

No. 2 submits that the parties have amicably settled the dispute. The

Respondent No. 2 has filed the affidavit. Paragraph 2 to 4 of the said

affidavit reads as under:-

                    2) I state that due to some misunderstanding,
                    hasty situations, the said F.I.R. has been lodged
                    against the Petitioner and that, the Petitioner has
                    also lodged a Cross F.I.R. against me under the same
                    offence.
                    3) I state that both of us have been residing within
                    the same area and locality since many years,
                    therefore we are neighbours to each other and I
                    have resolved all my disputes with the Petitioner
                    along with the intervention of our family members,
                    family friends, and colleagues as there were certain
                    mistakes committed by me too, on the day when the
                    incident had taken place. Therefore, I do not wish to
                    proceed against them and thus, I wish to withdraw
                    the said F.I.R.
                    4) I state that I have realized my mistake which
                    was done in a hasty situation and due to
                    misunderstanding, but now I have settled the
                    dispute amicably with the above named Petitioner,
                    therefore I am no more interested to proceed with
                    the F.I.R. lodged by me. Moreover, pendency of the
                    present proceeding would harm and destroy the
                    reputation of the above named Petitioners as well as
                    myself.

Bhagyawant Punde
                                            3/5                     13-CRWP-1073-2021.doc




3.                 Respondent No. 2 is present before this Court. He stated that it

is his voluntary act to enter into the settlement and give consent for

quashing the FIR. It is submitted that entire incident had happened due to

misunderstanding.



4.                 Since the Respondent No. 2 is not going to support the

allegations in the FIR, the chances of conviction of Petitioner is remote and

bleak. Further continuation of investigation of FIR dated 6 th December 2019

being C.R. No. 413 of 2019 registered at Nagpada Police Station, Mumbai

for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 323, 504 of IPC, would

tantamount to the abuse of the process of the Court.



5.                 The Supreme Court in the case of Giansingh v. State of Punjab

and Another1 has held that, the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and

predominatingly civil flavour stand on a different footing for the purposes of

quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial,

mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offence arising

out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the

wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolves

their entire dispute. In this category of cases, the High Court may quash the

criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the


1    2012 (10) SCC 303

Bhagyawant Punde
                                            4/5                      13-CRWP-1073-2021.doc




offender and the victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and

continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression

and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not

quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and

compromise with the victim. It is further held that, as inherent power is of

wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in

accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz.: (I) to secure the

ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court.



6.                 In the light of discussion in foregoing paragraphs, to secure the

ends of justice and prevent the abuse of the process of the law/Court, the

writ petition deserves to be allowed, however, cost deserves to be imposed

on the Petitioner. Hence, we pass the following order:-

                                         ORDER

A) The writ petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause

(a), which reads as under:-

(a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ/ order/ direction in the nature of writ calling for records and proceedings of F.I.R. dated 06th December, 2019 being C.R. No. 413 of 2019 registered at Nagpada Police

U/s's 324, 323, 504 of Indian Penal Code. After examining the legality and propriety thereof, this

Bhagyawant Punde 5/5 13-CRWP-1073-2021.doc

Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the said F.I.R. against the Petitioner on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of the case.

B) The Petitioner to deposit Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees

Twenty Five Thousand), in the account mentioned

herein below, within three weeks from today.

                    Name of Bank of Account: :           Children Aid Soc
                                                         Donation
                     Bank Account No.                :   02370100005612
                     Bank Name                       :    UCO Bank
                     Branch                          :    Matunga Mumbai
                     IFSC Code                       :   UCBA0000237

C)                  It is made clear that this order will take effect only

after depositing the aforesaid amount of cost in the

account mentioned herein above.

D) Rule made absolute to above extent. The writ

petition stands disposed of accordingly.

E) List the matter under the caption 'For Compliance'

on 15.04.2021 for compliance of directions

contained in this order.

( MANISH PITALE, J.) (S. S. SHINDE, J.)

Bhagyawant Punde

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter