2020 NearLaw (BombayHC Nagpur) Online 1069
Bombay High Court

JUSTICE SUNIL B. SHUKRE JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR

Shri Vaibhav S/o Suresh & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.106 OF 2020

6th February 2020

Petitioner Counsel: Mr. Rohit P. Masurkar
Respondent Counsel: Mr. A.D. Sonak, Mr. I.A. Fidvi

HeadNote : Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned APP for respondent No1 and learned counsel for respondent No2 who appears by waiving notice on behalf of respondent No2.
The pursis jointly filed by applicant No1 and respondent No2 dated 05.02.2020 is taken on record.
The dispute between the applicants on the one hand and respondent No2 on the other is matrimonial dispute and its nature is purely private and, therefore, it comes within the parameters of the law laid down by the Honble Apex Court in case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Ors.
This is the reason why we find that there is no need for this Court to wait of any formal reply to be filed by the respondent No1/State.
Applicant No1 and respondent No2 both are personally present before this Court.
The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (1) subject to the condition that applicant No1 and respondent No2 together shall deposit an amount of Rs10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) in the account of Public Prosecutor, Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur for the purpose of development of library including digital library, installation of sever and digitalization of library within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which this order shall stand automatically cancelled and this Criminal Application shall stand restored to the file of this Court for fresh hearing and disposal, in accordance with law.

Cases Cited :
Para 5: Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Ors., (2014) 6 SCC 466

JUDGEMENT

SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned APP for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.2 who appears by waiving notice on behalf of respondent No.2.

2. Admit.

3. Heard forthwith by consent of learned counsel for the parties.

4. The pursis jointly filed by applicant No.1 and respondent No.2 dated 05.02.2020 is taken on record.

5. The dispute between the applicants on the one hand and respondent No.2 on the other is matrimonial dispute and its nature is purely private and, therefore, it comes within the parameters of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Ors. (2014) 6 SCC 466. This is the reason why we find that there is no need for this Court to wait of any formal reply to be filed by the respondent No.1/State. Filing of the reply on behalf of the State is, therefore, dispensed with.

6. Applicant No.1 and respondent No.2 both are personally present before this Court. They are duly identified by their respective counsel. Both of them submit that they have voluntarily reached the settlement in between themselves as a result of which, they have started living together and that there is no dispute any more existing in between them.

7. In view of above, we are inclined to allow the application.

8. The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (1) subject to the condition that applicant No.1 and respondent No.2 together shall deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) in the account of Public Prosecutor, Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur for the purpose of development of library including digital library, installation of sever and digitalization of library within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which this order shall stand automatically cancelled and this Criminal Application shall stand restored to the file of this Court for fresh hearing and disposal, in accordance with law.