Bombay High Court
Dhanyakumar Chintaman Yermal And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 11 July, 2016
Bench: B.R. Gavai
1 apl141.15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.141/2015
1. Dhanyakumar Chintaman Yermal,
aged about 68 years,
2. Sou. Ratnamala Dharamkumar Yermal,
aged 65 years,
Both r/o Vithabai Nagar, Pusad,
Tq. Pusad, Dist. Yavatmal.
3. Sau. Archana Mahavir Gadekar,
aged 35 years,
R/o Vithabai Nagar, Late Thawara
Naik V.J.N.T. Ashram Shala,
Hundikhurd, Tq. Pusad, Dist.
Yavatmal.
4. Sou. Alochana Sunil Bantarwar,
aged about 46 years, r/o Vithabai
Nagar, Pusad, Tq. Pusad,
Dist. Yavatmal.
5. Manoj Dhanyakumar Yermal,
aged 43 years,
Nos. 4 and 5 r/o Police Quarter,
Pusad, Tq. Pusad, dist. Yavatmal.
6. Kishor Dhanyakumar Yermal,
aged major, r/o Vithabai Nagar,
Pusad, Tq. Pusad, Dist. Yavatmal. .....APPLICANTS
...V E R S U S...
1. The State of Maharashtra through
Police Station Officer, Police Station,
Pusad City, Dist. Yavatmal.
2. Sou. Seema Kishor Yermal,
aged 34 years, Occ. Service,
::: Uploaded on - 12/07/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 08:56:28 :::
2 apl141.15.odt
r/o c/o Smt. Pratibha Prabhakar
Tekait, R/o Deulgaon, Sakharsa,
Tq. Mehkar, Dist. Buldana. ...NON APPLICANTS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. R. K. Thakkar, Advocate for applicants.
Mr. N. B. Jawade, A.P.P. for non applicant no.1-State.
Mr. A. M. Kukday, Advocate for non applicant no.2.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- B. R. GAVAI & V. M. DESHPAND E, JJ.
DATED :-
JULY 11, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : B. R. GAVAI, J.)
1.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by
consent of the parties.
2. By the present application, the applicants have applied for
quashing of the First Information Report No.38/2015 registered with
Police Station, Pusad City for an offence punishable under Section
498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Applicant no.6 and non applicant no.2 were married to
each other on 02.09.2009. After marriage, the applicant no.6 and
non applicant no.2 were residing together. The couple was also
blessed with a male child. However, after birth of the child, it
appears that there arose some dispute between husband and wife
and as such non applicant no.2 left the company of the applicant
3 apl141.15.odt
no.6 and started residing at her sister's house. It appears that out of
the said dispute, the aforesaid FIR came to be registered.
4. Originally, the application was filed on behalf of applicant
nos. 1 to 5, who were relatives of the applicant no.6 on the ground
that the allegations made against the said applicants are vague in
nature. However, it appears that subsequently, the matter was
settled between applicant no.6 and non applicant no.2, wherein they
decided to give an end to their relationship. It was agreed that the
applicant no.6 shall pay an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- towards full and
final settlement towards maintenance of non applicant no.2 and the
minor child. In view of the settlement, a decree for divorce also
came to be passed on 12.02.2016. As such, applicant no.6-husband
was also implicated in the present proceeding.
5. Mr. Kukday, learned counsel for non applicant no.2
reiterates about the settlement and has also placed on record a copy
of the decree of divorce passed by the Family Court.
5. The Apex Court in the case of B. S. Joshi & Ors. ..vs..
State of Haryana & anr; AIR 2002 SC 1386 has held that if the
4 apl141.15.odt
matrimonial dispute has been settled between the parties, this Court
can exercise powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure
Code to quash and give an end to the criminal proceedings. We find
that the present case is a fit case where this Court should exercise
powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure code and give
an end to the criminal proceedings.
6. In that view of the matter, the Criminal Application is
allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
(V. M. Deshpande) (B. R. Gavai)
kahale
