Bombay High Court
Shriman Rajesh S/O Chandrakant ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 8 March, 2016
Bench: B.R. Gavai
APL898.15.odt 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL)NO.898 OF 2015
APPLICANTS: 1 Shriman Rajesh son of Chandrakant
Wath, Aged About 42 years,
Occupation: Service, Resident of plot
number 36, new nandanwan gurudev
nagar, Nagpur, Police Station
ig nandanwan, District Nagpur.
ACCUSED NO.1.
2 Shriman Pramod son of Wamanrao
Kolhe, Aged about 51 years,
occupation-Service, Resident of plot
number 190, om nagar, near nagoba
temple, Nagpur. Police Station
Sakardhara District nagpur. ACCUSED
NUMBER 2.
3 Shrimati Vidya wife of Pramod Kolhe,
Aged about 45 years, Occupation-
Service, Resident of plot number 190,
om nagar, near nagoba temple,
Nagpur Police Station Sakardhara
District Nagpur. ACCUSED NUMBER
3.
4 Shrimati Veena wife of Shrihari Bele
Aged about 44 years, Occupation-
Service, Resident of plot number 11,
new daimond nagar, police station
nandanwan Nagpur, District Nagpur,
ACCUSED NUMBER 4.
::: Uploaded on - 09/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 08:11:02 :::
APL898.15.odt 2/4
5 Shriman Chandrakant son of
Shalikram Wath, Aged about 72 years,
Occupation-retired, Resident of plot
number 36, new nandanwan, gurudev
nagar, police station nandanwan
Nagpur, District Nagpur. ACCUSED
NUMBER 5.
6
Shrimati Kamal wife of Chandrakant
Wath, Aged about 65 years,
Occupation-House wife, Resident of
plot number 36, new nandanwan,
gurudev nagar, police station
nandanwan Nagpur, District Nagpur.
ACCUSED NUMBER 6.
ig -VERSUS-
NON- 1 The State of Maharashtra, through its
APPLICANTS: Police Station Nandanwan, District -
Nagpur.
2 Shrimati Shalini wife of Rajesh Wath,
Aged about years, Occupation-
service, Resident of care of R.K.
Madankar, plot number 5, old
nandanwan, Jagnade Square Nagpur
440009. COMPLAINANT.
Shri Karan Singh Ramesh Gour, Advocate for the applicants.
Shri V. A. Thakre, APP for respondent State
CORAM: B.R. GAVAI AND A.S.CHANDURKAR, JJ.
DATED: 8TH MARCH, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per B. R. Gavai, J)
1. Rule. Rule is returnable forthwith and heard by
consent of the parties.
APL898.15.odt 3/4
2. The present application is filed under Section 482 of
the Criminal Procedure Code for allowing the applicant Nos.1 to 6
and the non-applicant No.2 to compound the proceedings and for
quashing the First Information Report No.190/2013 dated 3-6-
2013, Charge-sheet No.191/2013 dated 27/9/2013 and Regular
Criminal Case No.3910/2013 pending before the 8 th Joint Civil
judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class No.1
Nagpur.
ig The non-applicant No.2 is personally present in the
matter and she reiterates about the settlement arrived at between
her and the applicants.
4. The non-applicant No.2 is the wife of the applicant
No.1. The rest of the applicants are relatives of the applicant No.1.
It appears that there is a matrimonial dispute between the
applicant No.1 and the non-applicant No.2. On account of said
dispute, the non-applicant No.2 had lodged the first information
report against the applicants. On the basis of the first information
report, the investigation was carried out and the charge-sheet was
filed against the present applicants.
5. However, it appears that during the pendency of the
proceedings, the matter has been amicably settled between the
applicants and the non-applicant No.2. The non-applicant No.2
APL898.15.odt 4/4
has filed an affidavit dated 15-12-2015 wherein she has reiterated
the settlement between her and the applicant. The non-applicant
No.2 has further stated that on account of lodging of the first
information report by her against the applicants, the relations with
the applicants have become strained.
6. The Apex Court in B. S. Joshi and others v. State of
Haryana & another (2003) 4 SCC 675 has held that if the parties in
the matrimonial matter have arrived at the settlement, the Court
should exercise power under Section 482 of the Criminal
Procedure Code to give an end to the criminal proceedings.
7. We find that this is a fit case wherein this Court should
exercise power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code
to give an end to the criminal proceedings arising out of
matrimonial dispute.
8. Rule is made, therefore, absolute in terms of prayer
clause (b) & (c).
JUDGE JUDGE
//MULEY//
