Ashok S/O Suresh Bhosale And ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. P.S.O. ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 2269 Bom

                                                                         apl309.16


                                            1




                                                                           
                                                  
                                                 
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
                  Criminal Application [APL] No. 309 of 2016




                                          
     1.
                             
             Ashok son of Suresh Bhosale,
             aged 28 years,
             occupation service,
                            
             resident of 504, Manjunath
             Residency, 1st Cross,
             Kaggadaspura, C.V. Raman Nagar,
             Bangalore-560 093.
      

     2.      Suresh son of Vishwanath
             Bhosale,
   



             aged 54 years,
             occupation retired,

     3.      Sau. Vimal wife of Suresh
             Bhosale,





             aged 48 years,
             occupation - Housewife,

     4.      Ku. Suverna daughter of Suresh
             Bhosale,





             aged 27 years,
             occupation - Household,

             Sr. Nos. 2,3 and 4 residents of
             Bhau Patil Chawl, Room No.10,
             Dr. Ambedkar Road,
             Thane [W] 400 601.
     5.      Sau. Richa wife of Ashok Bhosale,
             aged about 27 years,




    ::: Uploaded on - 06/05/2016                   ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:53:30 :::
                                                                             apl309.16


                                            2




                                                                              
                                                      
             occupation Household,
             resident of Tadoba Green Park
             Bar & Restaurant, Wadala
             Pimpalneri, Chimur Village,




                                                     
             Tq. Warora,
             Distt. Chandrapur-442 903.                  .....      Applicants.


                                          Versus




                                          
     State of Maharashtra,
     through Police Station
     Officer,
                             
     Police Station, Chimur,
                            
     Distt. Chandrapur,
     Pin Code 442 903.                                 ....      Respondent.


                                    *****
      


     Mr. R.R. Vyas, Adv., for the Applicants.
   



     Mr. Vinod Thakre, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondent sole.

                                           *****





                                   CORAM    :      B. R. GAVAI AND
                                                   MRS. SWAPNA S. JOHI, JJ.

Date : 04th May, 2016

ORAL JUDGMENT [Per B. R. Gavai, J.]:

01. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned Additional

Public Prosecutor, Mr. Vinod Thakre, waives service for respondent

apl309.16

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.

02. The Applicants have approached this Court praying for

quashing and setting aside various criminal proceedings. The Applicant

February, 2012.

No.1 and the Applicant No.5 were married to each other on 3rd

However, it appears that after the marriage, there

arose differences between them. As an offshoot of those disputes,

various criminal proceedings came to be initiated by the applicant no.5

against her husband, the applicant no.1, and the other applicants, who

are relatives of the applicant no.1.

03. However, it appears that during pendency of proceedings,

the marital dispute has been amicably resolved and the parties have

agreed to give an end to their relationship. As per the agreement,

parties have also agreed to give an end to the criminal proceedings

between them.

04. 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

apl309.16

exercise powers under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, to give

an end to the criminal proceedings.

05. Rule is, therefore, made absolute in terms of Prayer Clauses

[a], [b] and [c].

                                        
               Judge
                              ig                                       Judge
                            
                                   -0-0-0-0-
      

     |hedau|