Bombay High Court
Amol S/O Sureshrao Potbhare And ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 2 September, 2016
Bench: S.B. Shukre
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Criminal Application No. 8 of 2016
Applicants : 1) Amol son of Sureshrao Potbhare, aged about
28 years, Occ: Labour
2) Suresh Vasantrao Potbhare, aged about 49
years, Occ: Labour
3) Shobhabai Sureshrao Potbhare, aged about 46
years, Occ: Household,
All residents of Plot No. 626, Chindwara Road,
Beside Sumitra Mangal Karlaya, Near Shashan Ghat,
Mankapur, Nagpur
4) Naresh Vasantrao Potbhare, Occ: Private,
resident of 6, Bajhrang Nagarm, Koradi Road, Nagpur
5) Liladhar Vasantrao Potbhare, Occ: Private,
resident of 626-A, 626, Chindwara Road,
Beside Sumitra Mangal Karlaya, Near Shashan Ghat,
Mankapur, Nagpur
6) Satish Ramchandraji Girade, aged about 38
years, Occ: Private
7) Sau Anita w/o Satish Girade, aged about 32
years, Occ: Household,
Applicants No. 6 and 7, resident of Plot No. 117,
::: Uploaded on - 07/09/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 08/09/2016 00:13:24 :::
2
Gandhi Gate, B/H Renuka Complex, Girade
Patang Stores, Mahal, Nagpur
versus
Respondents : 1) State of Maharashtra, through Police
Station Officer, Koradi, Tahsil and District
Nagpur
2) Sau Sonu @ Priya w/o Amol Potbhare, aged
about 19 years, Occ: Household, resident of Behind
Railway Station, Railway Quarters, Ramgarh, Kamptee,
District Nagpur
Shri A. D. Patil, Advocate for applicant
Shri Harshal Dube, Addl. Public Prosecutor for respondent no. 1
Shri Deul Pathak, Advocate for respondent no. 2
--------
Coram : S. B. Shukre, J
Dated : 2nd September 2016
Oral Judgment
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants; learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for respondent no.1-State and learned counsel for respondent no. 2.
Admit. Heard finally by consent of parties.
2. This application has been filed with a prayer to quash the criminal
proceedings in Regular Criminal Case No. 684 of 2014 initiated on the basis of
complaint lodged by respondent no. 2 alleging her harassment and cruelty as
contemplated under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Applicant no. 1
Amol and respondent no. 2 Sau Sonu @ Priya - husband and wife, who are at
loggerheads and quarreling on account of multiple differences and disputes
between them, have ultimately decided to amicably settle the differences and
dispute. The petition for divorce by consent filed by them before the Family
Court, has been allowed by judgment and order dated 1 st October 2014. They
had filed memorandum of understanding dated 4.9.2014 before the Family
Court (page 19 of the present application). Clause (3) of this memorandum of
understanding is relevant for the present purpose. It indicates unequivocally
that the husband and wife (now divorced) have decided to finally put an end to
the criminal proceeding in Regular Criminal Case No. 684 of 2014 in a peaceful
manner. They have also agreed to join hands with each other in doing so. So
far as applicants no. 2 to 7 are concerned, they appear to have been only
incidentally dragged in the dispute between the main parties, ex-husband ex-
wife. Therefore, intention between the main parties would equally apply to the
remaining parties. Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 has no objection.
Learned APP states that appropriate orders in the interest of justice may be
passed.
3. The law governing such matters has been settled. The Honourable Apex
Court in its judgment in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & anr (Special Leave
Petition (Cri) No. 8989 of 2010 has observed that in certain offences which
overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavour having arisen out of
natrimony, family dispute where the wrong is basically to victim and the
offender and victims have settled all disputes between them amicably,
irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable,
the High Court may within the framework of its inherent power under Section
482 Cr. P. C., quash the criminal proceedings or criminal complaint or FIR if it is
satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of
offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice
shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated.
4. In the present case, I am of the view that as the applicant and
respondent no. 2 who have already obtained decree of divorce by mutual
consent and have amicably settled dispute between them, the application can
be allowed.
5. Criminal Application is allowed and it is directed that criminal
proceedings bearing Regular Criminal Case No. 684 of 2014 (The State of
Maharashtra v. Amol Sureshrao Potbhare & ors) pending on the file of the
Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No. 6, Nagpur are hereby quashed and set
aside and the applicants-accused stand acquitted of the offence punishable
under Sections 409A, 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Criminal Application is disposed of in the above terms.
S. B. SHUKRE, J
joshi
Certificate
I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct copy of the original signed
judgment.
Uploaded by -
H S Joshi, Private Secretary to Hon'ble Judge
Uploaded on - 7.9.2016.
