Bombay High Court
Devendra S/O Laluram Yadav And ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. P.S.O. ... on 18 December, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1 apl627.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 627 OF 2016
1] Devendra Laluram Yadav,
aged 32 years, Occ. Service.
2] Sau. Sheela Laluram Yadav,
aged 55 years, Occ. Household,
3] Laluram Chandrasingh Yadav,
aged 57 years, Occ. Service,
4] Vinay Laluram Yadav,
aged 26 years, Occ. Education.
All R/o. F-38, Rajendra Park, Nangloi,
West Delhi, Delhi-110041.... APPLICANTS
...VERSUS...
1] State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station Officer,
Police Station, M.I.D.C.,
Nagpur, District Nagpur.
2] Sau. Santoshi alias Chetna w/o
Devendra Yadav, aged about 30 years,
Occ., Household, R/o. Harbans Society,
Row House No. 21, Isasani Gram
Panchayat, MIDC Nagpur....... NON-APPLICANTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri R.M.Patwardhan, Advocate for applicants
Shri D.P.Thakre, APP for Non-applicant No.1 - State
Shri A.A.Gupta, Advocate for Non-applicant No.2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE AND
M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.
th
Date : 18 DECEMBER, 2017 .
::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2017 02:04:12 :::
2 apl627.16.odt
JUDGMENT (P.C.)
This application is filed seeking quashing of the
first information report filed by the non-applicant No.2 - Sau.
Santoshi @ Chetna w/o Devendra Yadav, against the
applicants for the offence punishable under Section 498-A
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at
Police Station M.I.D.C. Nagpur vide Crime No. 806 of
03.06.2016.
2] Notice was issued by this Court on 07.09.2016.
All parties were served. The matter was thereafter admitted.
The matter was thereafter fixed for final hearing. The matter
was referred to mediator, but the mediation failed.
3] The non-applicant No.2 - original complainant is
personally present before this Court and she is identified by
Shri Gupta, the learned counsel appearing for her. The
applicants and non-applicant No.2 have filed compromise
pursis dated 18.12.2017 stating that the matter is settled
between them, which is marked as "X" for identification. The
Non-applicant No.2 states before this Court that in view of the
3 apl627.16.odt
said settlement, she does not want to proceed further
against the applicants for the offence she complained of
under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal
Code against the applicants.
4] In view of the aforesaid position and the law laid
down by the Apex Court in case of Gian Singh vrs. State of
Punjab, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, the application is
allowed in terms of prayer clause (i), which is reproduced
below.
(i) quash and set aside the First Information Report for
prosecution of the Applicants for having committed
offence punishable under Section 498-A, 34 of I.P.C.
registered by the Police Station M.I.D.C., Nagpur, vide
Crime No. 806/2016 on 03.06.2016 (Annexure No.1),
and the applicants may be set at liberty in the interest
of justice.
The First Information Report registered under
Section 498-A r/w 34 of I.P.C. by the Police Station M.I.D.C.,
Nagpur, vide Crime No. 806/2016 on 03.06.2016 against the
applicants is hereby quashed and set aside. No order as to
costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Rvjalit
