Bombay High Court
Harsh Chandru Punjabee vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 22 June, 2016
Bench: Naresh H. Patil
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 01/07/2016
rpa 1/7 wp-1459-1460-16.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1459 OF 2016
Harsh Chandru Punjabee .. Petitioner
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1460 OF 2016
Harsh Chandru Punjabee & Ors. .. Petitioners
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
......
Ms. Devika Deshmukh i/b. Mr.Nachiket V. Khaladkar, Advocate for
the Petitioners.
Mr. J. P. Yagnik, APP for the Respondent - State.
......
CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND
PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ.
DATED : JUNE 22, 2016.
JUDGMENT (Per PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) : -
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2 Learned APP waives service for the respondent -
State.
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 01/07/2016
rpa 2/7 wp-1459-1460-16.doc
3 The petitioners in both the petitions have invoked the
writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India as well as inherent powers under Section
482 of the Code of Ciminal Procedure. Petitioners have
challenged the First Information Report ("FIR", for short)
registered with the concerned police station on the ground that
the parties have amicably settled their dispute.
4 Petitioner in criminal Writ Petition No.1459 of 2016
has challenged the FIR registered with Juhu Police Station vide
CR No.286 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Section
406, 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code ("IPC", for short) and
under Section 66(c) (d) of the Information Technology Act ("IT
Act", for short). The said FIR has been registered at the instance
of the second respondent on 28th July, 2015. Second respondent is
wife of the petitioner.
5 In the aforesaid FIR dated 28th July, 2015, registered
vide C.R.No.286 of 2015, it is alleged that the petitioner and
second respondent had solemnized their marriage on 11th
December, 2010. Thereafter, second respondent was harassed
and ill-treated by petitioner - accused. It is further alleged that
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 01/07/2016
rpa 3/7 wp-1459-1460-16.doc
petitioner - accused has operated the bank account of the second
respondent by impersonation and transferred the amount from
fixed deposit account to his account and, thereafter, again
redeposited the said amount in the account of the second
respondent.
6 The subject matter of Criminal Writ Petition No.1460
of 2016 is the FIR dated 26th May, 2015 registered at the instance
of second respondent with D.N. Nagar police station.
ig The said
FIR had been registered for the offences punishable under
Section 498-A and 406 of the IPC vide C.R. No.346 of 2015. The
said FIR has been registered against the petitioners. Petitioner
no.1 is the husband of second respondent. In short, the FIR vide
C.R.No.286 of 2015 and 346 of 2015 have been registered at the
instance of second respondent against the petitioner/husband.
However, in C.R.No.346 of 2015 along with petitioner no.1/
husband, the second respondent has impleaded other relatives of
the petitioner no.1 as accused. In the FIR, it is alleged that
pursuant to the solemnization of the marriage between second
respondent and petitioner no.1, she was subjected to harassment
causing mental cruelty to her. It is alleged that the Stridhan of
second respondent was misappropriated by the accused.
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 01/07/2016
rpa 4/7 wp-1459-1460-16.doc
7 Learned counsel appearing for the respective parties
have submitted that the dispute between both the parties have
been amicably resolved and with a view to maintain peace and
harmony, they have decided to put an end to the proceedings
initiated by the second respondent. It was pointed out that
petitioner and second respondent have entered into a
compromise of their pending disputes by way of Consent Terms
filed before the Family Court at Mumbai. The parties have filed a
petition for divorce by mutual consent vide M.J. Petition No.F-
2388 of 2015. Parties have also tendered Consent Terms in the
said proceedings before the Family Court. As per clause (8) of
the Consent Terms, petitioner and respondent no.2 have agreed
that the petitioner shall file the petition under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, for quashing the FIR. Several other
terms were mentioned in the said Consent Terms which includes
depositing of an amount of Rs.2 crores by the petitioner husband
towards the full and final settlement of the claim of respondent
no.2 - wife. The said Consent Terms are taken on record and
marked "X" for identification.
8 The complainant/respondent no.2 has tendered
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 01/07/2016
rpa 5/7 wp-1459-1460-16.doc
affidavit in both the petitions wherein it is stated that she has
resolved the disputes with the accused in both the complaints. It
is also stated that Consent Terms are being filed in the Family
Court in the petition for divorce by mutual consent. It is also
stated that by order dated 3rd June, 2016, the Family Court has
allowed the said petition and the marriage between the
respondent no.2 and the petitioner - husband has been dissolved.
It is further mentioned that the second respondent is consenting
for quashing the FIR which is under challenge in the aforesaid
petition. Both the affidavits are taken on record and marked
"X-1" and "X-2", respectively for the purpose of identification.
9 We have perused the contents of the petition, the
Consent Terms tendered by the parties before the Family Court
and the affidavits submitted by the second respondent before this
Court. From the said documents, it is apparent that the parties in
respective petitions have arrived at amicable settlement and the
complainant has consented for quashing the proceedings. It is
pertinent to note that the second respondent has agreed as per
the Consent Terms that she would consent for quashing the FIR
registered at her instance. It can be seen that the dispute
between the complainant and the accused in both the FIR are of
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 01/07/2016
rpa 6/7 wp-1459-1460-16.doc
individual nature and arising out of matrimonial disputes. Taking
into consideration the fact that parties have settled their disputes
amicably and want to live their life peacefully, we are inclined to
allow the present petition.
10 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh
V/s. State of Punjab & Anr.1 has observed that in case of
disputes which are of private nature, the High Court in exercise
of its powers can quash the proceedings in the event of amicable
settlement between the parties.
11 In view of the aforesaid circumstances, we pass the
following order:
:: O R D E R ::
(i) Rule is made absolute in both the petitions.
(ii) FIR No.286 of 2015 registered with Juhu Police
Station for the offences punishable under Sections
406, 419 and 420 of the IPC is quashed and set aside.
1(2012) 10 - SCC 303
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 01/07/2016
rpa 7/7 wp-1459-1460-16.doc
(iii) FIR No.346 of 2015 registered with D.N. Nagar
Police Station for the offences punishable under
Sections 498-A and 406 of the IPC is quashed and set
aside.
(iv) Parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this
order.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)
