1 jg.apl 766.17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
Criminal Application (APL) No. 766 of 2017
Applicants : (1) Sacchitanand Shivdas Kedar
Aged about 32 years, Occ. Service
(2) Shivdas Natthuji Kedar
Aged about 61 years,
Occ. Agriculturist
(3) Sau. Vacchala Shivdas Kedar
Aged about 56 years,
Occ. Household work
(4) Vilas Shivdas Kedar
Aged about 36 years,
Occ. Service,
(5) Sau. Pramila Vilas Kedar
Aged about 35 years,
Occ. Household work
(6) Digambar Shivdas Kedar
Aged about 30 years,
Occ. Agriculturist
(7) Devanand Shivdas Kedar
Aged about 34 years,
Occ. Service
(8) Subodh Sudhar Tetu
Aged about 28 years,
Occ. Service,
R/o. New Khetan Nagar
Kaulkhed Akola
Tq. and Distt. Akola.
Applicants No. 1, 4, 5 and 7
R/o. Nandanvan Society,
Walekar Wadi, Chinchwad
Pune
Applicants No. 2, 3 and 6
R/o. Bilanpura, Achalpur
Tq. Achalpur Distt. Amravati.
.....2/-
::: Uploaded on - 08/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2017 01:54:41 :::
2 jg.apl 766.17.odt
// Versus //
Non Applicants (1) State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Khadan, Akola Tq. and
Distt. Akola.
(2) Sau. Rupali Sacchitanand
Kedar, aged about 25 years
Occ. Service
R/o. C/o. Pralhad Vishnu Ghayal,
Lambodar Residency,
Ganesh Nagar, Malkapur
Tq. and Distt. Akola.
Shri J. B. Gandhi, Advocate for the applicants
Shri V. P. Gangane, Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant
no. 1
Shri A. P. Kawale, Advocate for the non-applicant no. 2
CORAM : R. K. DESHPANDE AND
M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATE : 7-11-2017.
JUDGMENT (Per : M. G. GIRATKAR, J.)
By the present application, the applicants challenge FIR No. 298/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered by the non-applicant no. 1 on the report of the non-applicant no. 2.
2. It is submitted that marriage of the applicant no. 1 and non- applicant no. 2 was solemnized on 6-8-2015. There was some dispute .....3/-
::: Uploaded on - 08/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2017 01:54:41 :::
3 jg.apl 766.17.odt between applicants and non-applicant no. 2. Due to misunderstanding, she lodged the report against the applicants. The non-applicant no. 2 also instituted the proceedings against the applicants under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and the Court has granted interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- and rent of Rs. 1,000/- per month to the non-applicant no. 2. The appeal was filed before the District and Sessions Judge, Akola. In said appeal bearing Criminal Appeal No. 127/2016 (under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act) before the learned Sessions Judge, Akola, the applicants and non-applicant no. 2 filed compromise pursis, Exhibit 17 thereby applicant no. 1 agreed to pay Rs. 11,50,000/- to the non-applicant no. 2 and the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. It was also agreed by the non-applicant no. 2 to withdraw the report lodged against the applicants.
3. Heard learned counsels appearing for the respective parties. Today, the non-applicant no. 2 and applicant no. 1 are present before the Court with their respective counsels. We have asked the non-applicant no. 2 about settlement between them as per annexure C. She has stated that she does not want to prosecute the applicants as the matter is amicably settled between them before the Sessions Court, Akola as per the terms and conditions written the pursis, Exhibit 17. She has .....4/-
::: Uploaded on - 08/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2017 01:54:41 :::
4 jg.apl 766.17.odt specifically stated to quash the First Information Report registered on her report.
4. In view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another (2012) 10 SCC 303, the criminal application is liable to the allowed. There is no possibility of any conviction of the applicants as the matter is settled between the complainant/non-applicant no. 2 and the applicants. She will not depose anything against the applicants. Hence it will be nothing but abuse of process of Court. In the result, we pass the following order :
(i) The criminal application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) and we quash and set aside FIR No. 298/2017 registered by the non-applicant no. 1 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal code against the applicants.
(ii) No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
wasnik
...../-
::: Uploaded on - 08/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2017 01:54:41 :::