Bombay High Court Allows Quashing of Criminal Proceedings in Family Property Dispute — Settlement Reached Between Brothers. Court holds that when parties have amicably settled their disputes and the complainant has no objection, continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law under Section 482 CrPC.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Prashant Kishor Mehta, filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of criminal proceedings in Criminal Revision Application No. 106 of 2016 and C.C. No. 662/PW/2009. The case arose from a family property dispute between the petitioner and his brother, Rajesh Kishor Mehta (original accused No. 2). The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was the original complainant. The petitioner challenged the judgment and order dated 8th August 2018 passed by the learned Special Judge for CBI, Greater Bombay. During the proceedings, the parties informed the court that they had amicably settled their disputes. The original complainant, Rajesh Kishor Mehta, who was the respondent No. 1, had no objection to the quashing of the proceedings. The court, after hearing the parties and considering the settlement, held that continuing the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. The court exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings to secure the ends of justice. The petition was allowed, and the impugned judgment and order were set aside. The court also directed that the parties be governed by the terms of the settlement.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of Proceedings - Section 482 CrPC - Settlement - The petitioner sought quashing of criminal proceedings arising from a family property dispute. The parties, who are brothers, entered into a settlement and the original complainant (brother) had no objection to the quashing. The court, considering the settlement and the fact that the dispute was primarily civil in nature, held that continuing the proceedings would be an abuse of process and quashed the same. (Paras 1-5)

B) Criminal Procedure Code - Inherent Powers - Section 482 CrPC - Abuse of Process - The court reiterated that inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised to prevent abuse of process of court and to secure the ends of justice. Where the parties have settled their disputes and the complainant does not wish to pursue the matter, quashing is warranted. (Paras 4-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioner should be quashed in light of the settlement between the parties and the no-objection from the original complainant.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 8th August 2018 passed by the learned Special Judge for CBI, Greater Bombay in Criminal Revision Application No. 106 of 2016 and C.C. No. 662/PW/2009 are quashed and set aside. The parties are to be governed by the terms of the settlement.

Law Points

  • Quashing of criminal proceedings
  • Section 482 CrPC
  • settlement between parties
  • abuse of process of law
  • family property dispute
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (BOM) (07) 70

Writ Petition No. 3250 of 2026

2026-07-07

Ashwin D. Bhobe, J.

Rizwan Merchant, Aditya Mithe, Abhay Dadhiwal, Minal Chandani, Monish Bhatia, Vidhi K., Esha Joshi, V. B. Konde-deshmukh, Devadatt Kamat, Aditya Raut

Prashant Kishor Mehta

Rajesh Kishor Mehta, Central Bureau of Investigation, State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal writ petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings arising from a family property dispute.

Remedy Sought

The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ to quash and set aside the judgment and order dated 8th August 2018 passed by the Special Judge for CBI, Greater Bombay in Criminal Revision Application No. 106 of 2016 and C.C. No. 662/PW/2009.

Filing Reason

The petitioner filed the petition to challenge the legality, propriety, and correctness of the impugned judgment and order, and to quash the criminal proceedings in light of the settlement between the parties.

Previous Decisions

The Special Judge for CBI, Greater Bombay had passed the impugned judgment and order dated 8th August 2018 in Criminal Revision Application No. 106 of 2016.

Issues

Whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed in light of the settlement between the parties and the no-objection from the original complainant.

Submissions/Arguments

The petitioner argued that the parties had amicably settled their disputes and the original complainant had no objection to the quashing of the proceedings. The respondent No. 1 (original complainant) confirmed the settlement and had no objection. The State did not oppose the quashing.

Ratio Decidendi

When parties to a criminal case arising from a family property dispute have amicably settled their differences and the original complainant has no objection to the quashing of proceedings, continuing the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised to quash such proceedings to secure the ends of justice.

Judgment Excerpts

Heard, Mr. Rizwan Merchant, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, Mr. Devadatt Kamat, learned Senior Advocate for the Respondent No. 1 and Mr. V. B. Konde-deshmukh, learned APP for the Respondent – State. By this Petition, the Petitioner has sought the following relief in prayer clauses (a) to (e)... The parties have amicably settled their disputes. The original complainant, who is the brother of the petitioner, has no objection to the quashing of the proceedings. In view of the settlement, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. The petition is allowed. The impugned judgment and order are quashed and set aside.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 CrPC challenging the judgment and order dated 8th August 2018 passed by the Special Judge for CBI, Greater Bombay in Criminal Revision Application No. 106 of 2016 and C.C. No. 662/PW/2009. The parties subsequently settled their disputes, and the original complainant had no objection to the quashing. The court heard the parties and allowed the petition.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 227
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 482
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Teacher's Petition Challenging Termination for Lack of B.Ed. Qualification. B.P.Ed. Not Equivalent to B.Ed. for Appointment as Assistant Teacher Under Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regula...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Application Challenging Bail Cancellation in Criminal Case Due to Addition of Further Offence. Addition of Section 307 IPC after bail justified cancellation as it indicated potential for further offences.