Bombay High Court
Ganesh Nanaji Pagar And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 2 March, 2017
Bench: A.S. Oka
sng 1 apl-1470.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1470 of 2016
Shri Ganesh Nanaji Pagar and Others. .. Applicants
Vs
The State of Maharashtra and Another. .. Respondents
-
Ms. Noorseema Baig i/b Shri Sarfaraz Khalife for the Applicants.
Mrs.S.V. Sonawane, APP for the Respondent No.1.
Shri Shantanu R. Phanse for the Respondent No.2.
-
CORAM : A.S. OKA &
SMT.ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ
DATED : 2ND MARCH 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT ( PER A.S. OKA, J)
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Applicants, the
learned APP for the first Respondent and the learned counsel appearing
for the second Respondent.
2. Rule. The learned APP waives service for the first
Respondent. The Advocate for the second Respondent waives service.
Forthwith taken up for final disposal.
3. The prayer in this Application under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "CrPC") is for quashing the
First Information Report (FIR) lodged at the instance of the second
Respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406 313,
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 18:31:58 :::
sng 2 apl-1470.16
323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The first
Applicant and the second Respondent are the husband and wife.
4. The prayer for quashing is pressed into service on the basis
of a settlement between the parties which is reflected from the
Settlement Agreement dated 5 th January 2017, a copy of which is
annexed to the affidavit of the second Respondent. We have perused
the said Settlement Agreement. The said Settlement Agreement records
that a Mediator was appointed by the Court at Manmad. The
settlement provides that the first Applicant who is a resident of Unites
States of America will take the second Respondent and their daughter
in the United States of America. The settlement records that the first
Applicant and the second Respondent will happily reside with the each
other. In terms of the settlement, the Criminal Miscellaneous
Application No.36 of 2010 was disposed of by the learned Judicial
Magistrate, First Class, Manmad. In the said order, the learned Judicial
Magistrate, First Class has referred to the settlement arrived at before
the learned Mediator and the report of the learned Mediator. The said
Application was filed by the second Respondent under Section 125 of
the CrPC.
5. Today, an affidavit is tendered by the second Respondent to
which Air Ticket provided by the first Applicant to the second
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 18:31:58 :::
sng 3 apl-1470.16
Respondent and their daughter Vaibhavi is annexed. In the affidavit, it
is recorded that the second Respondent will be flying to Unites States of
America (USA) on 17th March 2017. The photocopies of the passport of
the second Respondent and the daughter are annexed showing that H4
Visa has been granted to both of them by the authorities of USA. The
learned counsel appearing for the Applicants states that the Visa
granted to both of them will expire on 15th September 2017.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the Applicants states
that in the event the second Respondent applies for extension of Visa
granted to her, the first Applicant will make all possible efforts for grant
of extension of Visa to the second Respondent as well as the minor
daughter Vaibhavi. We accept the said statement.
7. The Settlement Agreement dated 5 th January 2017 contains
a clause that the first Applicant has agreed to take the second
Respondent and daughter Vaibhavi to United States of America within a
period of two months. Now, there is a substantial compliance with the
said assurance by the first Applicant as evidenced by the affidavit
tendered today by the second Respondent.
8. Thus, the settlement arrived at between the first Applicant
and the second Respondent in the form of Settlement Agreement dated
5th January 2017 has been acted upon.
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 18:31:58 :::
sng 4 apl-1470.16
9. The matrimonial dispute between the first Applicant and
the second Respondent was the root cause for registration of the offence
subject matter of this Application. Now, there is a complete settlement
of the matrimonial dispute to the satisfaction of the second Respondent.
Therefore, continuation of the criminal proceedings will cause undue
harassment to the first Applicant and the second Respondent.
Therefore, this is a fit case to exercise a power under Section 482 of the
CrPC.
10. Accordingly, we pass the following order.
ORDER :
(a) Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a),
which read thus:
"(a) To issue an appropriate order or direction,
for quashing the Charge sheet, dated 21.06.2016
filed in RCC No.68 of 2016, pending on the file of
the 1st JMFC Court, Manmad City, Nashik against
the Applicant Nos.1 to 7 and to acquit them;
(b) All concerned to act upon an authenticated copy of
this order.
(SMT.ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J) ( A.S. OKA, J )
