MANISHA HIMMATRAO SATPUTE AND ANR. vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. — APL/78/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 07th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM070050592026
Filing Number
APL/1549/2026
Filing Date
27-Apr-2026
Registration No
APL/78/2026
Registration Date
07-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale
Bench Type
Single
Category
CRIMINAL ( 9 )
Sub-Category
QUASHING OF FIR C.R., CHARGE SHEET OR PROSECUTION ( 26 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal
Decision Date
07-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Last updated 16-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.MANISHA HIMMATRAO SATPUTE AND ANR.
Adv. Nakul Vivek Shukla
-
2.VIDYA SUBHASH KAMBLE DESHMUKH
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
-
2.ASHWINI NIKHIL PATIL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ranjitsinha Raja BhonsaleView PDF
-
07-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ranjitsinha Raja BhonsaleView PDF
Summary of APL/78/2026 The High Court of Bombay (Kolhapur Circuit Bench) quashed FIR No. 214 of 2026 involving practicing advocates who were charged under criminal law and SC/ST Atrocities Act following an altercation during matrimonial proceedings. The court found the dispute arose from misunderstanding during emotionally charged discussions about divorce, with evidence showing no deliberate caste-based humiliation, and accepted the complainant's voluntary consent affidavit to withdraw proceedings, deeming continued prosecution an abuse of process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
07-May-2026
At 3.00 P.M.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale
-
27-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. APL/78/2026
Summary of APL/78/2026 The High Court of Bombay (Kolhapur Circuit Bench) quashed FIR No. 214 of 2026 involving practicing advocates who were charged under criminal law and SC/ST Atrocities Act following an altercation during matrimonial proceedings. The court found the dispute arose from misunderstanding during emotionally charged discussions about divorce, with evidence showing no deliberate caste-based humiliation, and accepted the complainant's voluntary consent affidavit to withdraw proceedings, deeming continued prosecution an abuse of process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts