Sahebrao S/O Kashinath ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 3983 Bom

                                      {1}
                                                         criappln1208.17.odt

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1208 OF 2017
                                       
 1.       Sahebrao s/o kashinath Munneshwar
          age major, occ. scientist
          r/o Flat No. 4, Second Floor,
          Shrikrishna Apartments,
          Ward No. 8, Meherauli,
          New Delhi 30.05.2016

 2.       Kashinath Sampatrao Munneshwar
          age 81 years, occ. agri.
          r/o Baladi, Tq. Umerkhed,
          Dist. Yavatmal.

 3.       Sarswati w/o Kashinath Munneshwar
          age 75 years, occ. household
          r/o Baladi, Tq. Umerkhed 
          Dist. Yavatmal.

 4.       Vishnu s/o Pandurang Gimekar
          age 64 years, occ. agril
          r/o Navi Abadi Hadgaon,
          Tq. Hadgaon, Dist. Nanded.

 5.       Anil s/o Vishnu Gimekar
          age 39 years, occ. agril
          r/o Navi Abadi Hadgaon
          Tq. Hadgaon, Dist. Nanded

 6.       Sow. Latabai w/o Vishnu Gimekar
          age 58 years, occ. household
          r/o Navi Abadi Hadgaon
          Tq. Hadgaon,
          Dist. Nanded.

 7.       Sow. Shantabai w/o Anil Gimekar
          age 33 years, occ. household
          r/o Navi Abadi Hadgaon,
          Tq. Hadgaon, Dist. Nanded.                          Applicants

          Versus




::: Uploaded on - 18/07/2017                ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:02:59 :::
                                            {2}
                                                                  criappln1208.17.odt


 1.       The State of Maharashtra
          Through Police Station
          Bhagyanagar
          Tq. Nanded, Dist. Nanded.

 2.       Sambhodhi @ Supriya w/o Sahebrao Munneshwar
          age 31 years, occ. household
          r/o Amol Niwas, Prabhat Nagar,
          Nanded, Dist. Nanded                     Respondents

 Mr. G.P. Shinde, advocate for the applicants. 
 Mr. K.D. Mundhe,, A.P.P. for respondent no. 1.
 Mr. Satej S. Jadhav, advocate for respondent no. 2.
  
                                       CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
                                                      A. M. DHAVALE, JJ.

DATE : 4th JULY, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER R. M. BORDE, J.)

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

3. This is an application seeking quashment of the criminal proceeding initiated in pursuance of lodging of First Information Report bearing No. 335/2008 on 07.12.2008 by Bhagyanagar Police Station, Dist. Nanded for offence punishable under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code.

4. It is informed that during pendency of the proceeding, petitioner no. 2 has passed away. As such, the proceeding stands abated against said petitioner. Petitioner no. 1 is the husband of

{3} criappln1208.17.odt

respondent no. 2. Their marriage was solemnised in the year 2008 at Nanded. However, after marriage, the relations between husband and wife remained strained and they parted company of each other. It is further informed that application under section 13(b) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was presented by the parties to the Principal Judge, South Family Court, Sanket, New Delhi on 22.05.2017. On consideration of the application, the Family Court has granted decree of divorce by way of mutual consent under the provisions of Hindu Marriage Act. It is recorded in paragraph 5 of the judgment delivered by the Family Court that as per the settlement between husband and wife - respondent no. 2, the total sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- was agreed to be paid to wife towards full and final settlement (past, present and future). Out of the settled amount, Rs. 4,00,000/- are received by the wife and it was decided that balance amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- shall be paid to wife at the time of applying for quashment of First Information Report. It is informed that demand draft for aforesaid sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- has been handed over to respondent-wife. Respondent-wife, who is present in the Court, acknowledges receipt of the amount by way of demand draft.

5. Parties i.e. husband and wife are present before the Court. The wife has admitted contents of affidavit. She is identified by learned counsel representing her. It is prayed by respondent-wife that since the matrimonial dispute between parties has been settled and since the present First Information Report was outcome of the matrimonial disharmony between the parties, the criminal proceeding deserves to be quashed.

{4} criappln1208.17.odt

6. Considering the contents of affidavit and he prayer made by complainant-respondent no. 2, we do not find any difficulty in directing quashment of criminal proceeding initiated in pursuance of lodging of First Information Report bearing no. 335/2008 for offences punishable under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Bhagyanagar Police Station, Nanded and, it is accordingly directed. Rule made absolute.

        ( A.M. DHAVALE )                                  ( R.M.BORDE )
                JUDGE                                           JUDGE

 dyb