Serious offenses, particularly those under IPC Section 307, cannot be quashed based solely on mutual agreements; courts must consider societal impacts and evidence relevancy.

JUDGMENT

NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.

Heard. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for both the parties.

2. Both these applications are cross applications in a sense that parties to both these applications are identical. The applicant No.2 in Criminal Application (APL) No. 1207/2025, is the non-applicant No.2, in Criminal Application (APL) No. 1203/2025, i.e. the informant. Likewise, the applicant No.5, in Criminal Application (APL) No. 1203/2025, is the non-applicant No.2, in Criminal Application (APL) No. 1207/2025 i.e. the informant.

3. The Criminal Application (APL) No. 1207/2025, seeks quashment of the First Information Report No. 213/2015, lodged against the applicant at the behest of the non-applicant No.2, for the offences punishable under Sections 307 , 143, 147, 148, 149, and 452, of the Indian Penal Code . Likewise, in Criminal Application (APL) No. 1203/2025, the application seeks quashing and setting aside of the First Information Report No. 214/2015, for the offence punishable under Sections 307 , 143, 147, 148, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code , with Section 4 and 25 of the Arms Act .

4. We have heard Shri Rawalani, learned Counsel for the applicant in Criminal Application (APL) No. 1207/2025, and also, Shri S.S. Ali, learned Counsel in Criminal Application (APL) No. 1203/2025. We have also heard Shri N.B. Jawade, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant No.1/State. Both these applications are challenging the cross First Information Reports mentioned supra, under various sections as mentioned above.

5. In both these applications, an affidavit-in-reply is filed by the respective non-applicant No.2, as also, a compromise deed entered into between the parties. The relevant extract of the affidavit-in- reply by the non-applicant No.2, in Criminal Application (APL) No. 1203/2025, is as under :

“6. That, deponent/respondent no. 2 and others is having no objection if Hon'ble court exercise inherent power and quash FIR no 214/2015 and its connected criminal case registered against accused no 1 to 12 registered for offences punishable u/s 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 452 of IPC, which is pending before Hon'ble Special court (for differently-able persons, Sr. Citizen and Marginalized Section of Society and Addl. Sessions Judge-10, Nagpur bearing session case no 310/2018.”

6. Similarly, in Criminal Application (APL) No. 1207/2025 an affidavit is filed by the non-applicant No.2, is as under :

“5. That, deponent/respondent no 2 and accused persons are cousin brother and relatives. The matter is amicably settled between both the parties. They have executed compromise deed and decided to withdraw counter cases of similar nature registered against both the parties. The incident is 10 years old and some of the accused are aged 75 years, 73 years, 66 years etc.”

7. Learned Counsel for the respective parties, therefore submits that the matter has been settled, and therefore, prays for quashing of the said First Information Report.

8. We have carefully perused the First Information Report, and the consequent charge-sheets filed by the prosecution agency, after the conclusion of the investigation.

9. Learned Counsel for the parties placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another , 2014 SCC Online 265, as also, judgment of Naushey Ali and others Vs. State of U.P. and Anr. , 2025(4) SCC 78.

10. As can be seen from the First Information Reports and the consequent charge-sheet, the offences complained of are mainly under Section 307 of the