Bombay High Court
REVN/272/2026 of Sampat Tukaram Jadhav and ors Vs The State of Maharashtra and ors on 15 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.272 OF 2026 Sampat Tukaram Jadhav and ors … Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra and ors. … Respondents *** Mr. Shrirang Katneshwarkar for Applicant M.
5.cr.revn.272.2026@.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.272 OF 2026
Sampat Tukaram Jadhav and ors
… Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and ors.
… Respondents
***
Mr. Shrirang Katneshwarkar for Applicant
M. Balraj Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Tejas D. Kothlikar for Respondent No.2.
***
CORAM : M.M. SATHAYE, J.
DATE : 15 OCTOBER, 2026
P.C. :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. The Revision Applicants are the sons of Respondent Nos.2 and 3, who are old parents. By the impugned order dated 09.03.2026, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Pune in Petition ‘E’ No.59 of 2025, application of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 filed under Section 144 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Ssanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking maintenance was allowed, directing the Applicants to pay Rs.5000/- per month to each parent from the date of filing of Petition till further orders.
3. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 appeared through advocate and sought time to file an Affidavit.
4. Today, learned advocate for Respondent nos.2 and 3 has tendered a Consent Affidavit affirmed on 13.10.2026 signed by Vina Khadpe
5. cr.revn.272.2026@.doc Respondent Nos.2 and 3 duly identified by their Advocate. The same is taken on record.
5. It is stated in the said Affidavit that during pendency of the Revision Application, with the intervention of the family members, ongoing disputes are amicably resolved. It is also stated that Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 no longer desire to enforce the maintenance order and have consented to quashing/setting aside the same. It is further stated that Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, during the pendency of the present Revision application, have started residing with Applicant No.1.
6. Considering the said statements made by Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on oath, the Criminal Revision Application is allowed. The impugned order dated 09.03.2026 is quashed and set aside.
7. The Criminal Revision Application is disposed of in the above terms. (M.M. SATHAYE, J.) Vina Khadpe