Bombay High Court
Anup S/O Rambhau Wankhede And ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. P.S. ... on 10 June, 2016
Bench: B.R. Gavai
Apl380.16
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Criminal Application [APL] No. 380 of 2016
1. Anup son of Rambhau Wankhede,
aged 39 years,
occupation service,
2. Smt. Shobhatai Rambhau Wankhede,
aged 58 years,
occupation - Nil,
3. Rambhau son of Namdev Wankhede,
aged 62 years,
occupation - Nil,
all residents of Plot No.59,
Ayodhya Nagar,
Nagpur.
4. Sau. Aparna wife of Manoj Wadhe,
aged 30 years,
occupation - Nil,
5. Manoj son of Hemantrao Wadhe,
aged about 38 years,
occupation - Doctor,
nos. 4 and 5 residents of
at Post Rajoli, Tq. Sindhewahi,
Distt. Chandrapur.
6. Bhagyashree wife of Anup Wankhede,
aged about 33 years,
occupation - nil,
resident of Plot No.59,
Ayodhya Nagar,
Nagpur. ..... Applicants.
::: Uploaded on - 18/06/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 04:54:24 :::
Apl380.16
2
Versus
State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station
Officer,
Police Station, Hudkeshwar,
Nagpur. .... Respondents.
ig *****
Ms. Rashmi Khaparde, Adv., for Applicant Nos. 1 to 5.
Mr. Nitin R. Bhishikar, Adv., for Applicant No.6.
Mr. M.J. Khan, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondent sole.
*****
CORAM : B. R. GAVAI AND
V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
Date : 10th june, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT [Per B. R. Gavai, J.]:
01. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned Additional
Public Prosecutor, Mr. M.J. Khan, waives service for respondent sole.
Heard learned counsel for the rival parties. By consent of rival parties,
this Criminal Application is taken up for final hearing and disposed of
by this Judgment and Order.
Apl380.16
02. By way of present Application, the Applicants have prayed
for quashing and setting aside the First Information Report No. 317/15
dated 13th July, 2015 registered by the respondent and the
consequent charge-sheet.
03. The Applicant No.1 and the Applicant No.6 were married to
each other on 8th March, 2011.
relatives of the Applicant No.1
The Applicant Nos. 2 to 5 are the
04. It appears that after the marriage, differences arose
between the applicant nos. 1 and 6, as a result of which, the aforesaid
First Information Report came to be lodged at the instance of Applicant
no.6 for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code. Investigation was conducted and finally a
charge-sheet came to be filed.
05. It also appears that the Applicant No.1 had filed a Petition
under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for
dissolution of the marriage. During pendency of the said Petition, the
Applicant No.6 had filed a Transfer Petition before this Court. However,
during pendency of the proceedings before the Family Court, the
parties agreed for sending the matter for mediation. The mediation
Apl380.16
was successful and it further appears that the matter has been
amicably settled between the parties. The Applicant Nos. 1 and 6, who
are personally present before this Court, reiterate about the settlement
and further state that they have resolved to give an end to their
disputes, and have also resumed co-habitation.
06.
The Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi & others Vs.
State of Haryana & another [ (2003) 4 SCC 675] has held that when
the parties have settled their matrimonial dispute, this Court should
exercise powers under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, to give
an end to the criminal proceedings. We, thus, find that the present
case is a fit case for exercising power under Section 482, Criminal
Procedure Code, for giving an end to the criminal proceedings.
07. Rule is, therefore, made absolute in terms of Prayer Clause
[i].
Judge Judge
-0-0-0-0-
|hedau|
Apl380.16
