2013 ALL MR (Cri) 627
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.S. OKA AND S.S. JADHAV, JJ.
Mr. Keshav Chandraparakash Chauhan & Ors. Vs. The State Of Maharashtra & Anr.
Criminal Application No.1013 of 2012
15th October, 2012
Petitioner Counsel: Mrs. MALLIKA A. INGALE
Respondent Counsel: Mrs. M.M. DESHMUKH, Mr. SANJAY S. MISHRA
Criminal P.C. (1973), S.482 - Penal Code (1860), Ss.498A, 406, 509 - Quashing of criminal proceedings - Matrimonial dispute - Leads to registration of offence - Both the parties agreed to settle dispute by filing divorce by mutual consent - Criminal proceedings liable to be dismissed. (Para 6)
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT :- Rule. Learned A.P.P. waives service for first respondent. Learned Advocate appearing for second respondent waives service. Taken up forthwith for final hearing.
2. Prayer in this application under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 is for quashing the proceeding of criminal case initiated on the basis of offence registered at the instance of the second respondent.
3. The first applicant and the second respondent are husband and wife. The second and fifth applicants are the members of the family of first applicant.
4. The prayer for quashing the criminal proceedings for offences under Section 498-A, 406 and 509 of Inian Penal Code is made on the basis of subsequent settlement between the first applicant and second respondent. Second respondent has filed an affidavit-in reply dated 30th August, 2012 in which she has accepted that the first applicant and herself have decided to file a joint petition before the concerned Family Court for obtaining a divorce by mutual consent after finalizing the criminal proceedings.
5. In paragraph 3 of the affidavit, the terms of the settlement have been briefly set out. In paragraph 4, the second respondent has stated that in view of the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings.
6. It appears that a matrimonial dispute between the first applicant and the second respondent led to registration of the offence. Hence, continuation of criminal proceedings after the settlement of dispute will cause prejudice to both the parties. Hence, a case is made out for quashing the criminal proceedings.
7. Accordingly, we pass following order:
(i) The Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b).