Bombay High Court
Vishisht V Dubey And Anr vs Shaily Vishisht Dubey And Anr on 3 February, 2021
Bench: S.S. Shinde, Manish Pitale
Digitally signed
by Laxmikant
Laxmikant G. Chandan
G. Date:
2021.02.05 (25) cri.wp-394.21.odt
Chandan 15:02:20
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.394 OF 2021
1] Vishisht V Dubey ]
Flat No.501, Block-B, Building No.23, ]
Bimbisar Nagar, ]
Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400065 ]
Mo. No.8108397447 ]
Email id - [email protected] ]
]
2] Meena Dubey ]
Age : 62 Yrs. Occ : Housewife, ]
Flat No.501, Block - B, Building No.23, ]
Bimbisar Nagar, ]
Goregaon (E), Mumbai - 400065 ]..... Petitioners.
Versus
1] Mrs. Shaily Vishisht Dubey ]
Age - 28 Yrs. Occu. - Employed ]
Flat No.402, Building H/29, ]
Pratiksha Nagar, Sion (E), ]
Mumbai - 400022 ]
Mo. No.9029040574/8450901297 ]
]
2] The State of Maharashtra ]..... Respondents.
Ms. Vaidehi Deshmukh a/w Mr. Sonali Pawar i/by Akshay R Kapadia for the
Petitioners.
Mr. Vinod P Sangvikar a/w Mr. Yogesh P Morbale and Ms. Vaishnavi Gholave
for Respondent No.1.
Mrs. S D Shinde, APP for the Respondent/State.
Mrs. Shaily V Dubey - Respondent No.1 present.
CORAM : S. S. SHINDE,
MANISH PITALE, JJ
DATE : 03rd FEBRUARY 2021
lgc 1 of 5
(25) cri.wp-394.21.odt
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER S S SHINDE, J)
1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the consent
of learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2 It is jointly submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioners and Respondent No.1 that the Petitioners and Respondent No.1
have amicably settled the dispute. It is also submitted that the Consent Terms
arrived at between the Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.1 have been filed
before the Family Court, Bandra. It is also submitted that the Petitioners have
deposited the amount of Rs.27,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs only) in
the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai.
3 The 1st Respondent is present before this Court. She has been
identified by her advocate. When we interacted with her, she stated that it is
her voluntary act without coercion to enter into the settlement and file the
consent terms before the Family Court at Bandra. She further stated that she
has no objection for quashing the impugned FIR. In support of her aforesaid
statements, the 1st Respondent has filed the affidavit-in-reply before this Court.
The said affidavit-in-reply of Respondent No.1 is taken on record.
4 In paragraph 8 of her affidavit in reply, the 1 st Respondent has
lgc 2 of 5
(25) cri.wp-394.21.odt
stated that the Petitioners and Respondent No.1 have decided to withdraw all
the cases against each other and their respective family members. It is also
stated that the 1st Respondent has no objection for quashing the FIR No.538 of
2016 registered with Wadala TT Police Station against the present Petitioners.
In paragraph 9 of the affidavit in reply, the 1 st Respondent has stated that she
has no objection to allow the prayers of the Petitioners for quashing the FIR. In
the said affidavit in reply, the 1 st Respondent has also stated the other details
about the settlement and the consent terms arrived at between the parties.
5 Since the Petitioners and the 1 st Respondent have amicably settled
the dispute and the said dispute arose out of matrimonial discord, and in view
of the fact that the parties have already arrived at the consent terms filed
before the Family Court Bandra, no fruitful purpose will be served by
continuing the further investigation/proceedings in connection with the
impugned Chargesheet filed in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 29 th
Court,l Bhoiwada, Dadar Mumbai dated 30/01/2019 in respect of FIR
No.538/2016 dated 07/12/2016 filed for the offences punishable under
Sections 498A, 504, 506, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered
with Wadala T.T. Police Station.
6 The Supreme Court in the case of Giansingh v. State of Punjab
and Another1 has held that, the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and
1 2012 (10) SCC 303
lgc 3 of 5
(25) cri.wp-394.21.odt
predominatingly civil flavour stand on a different footing for the purposes of
quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial,
mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offence arising out
of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is
basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolves their entire
dispute. In this category of cases, the High Court may quash the criminal
proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and
the victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of
the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and
extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case
despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. It is
further held that, as inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory
limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in
such power viz.: (I) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the
process of any court.
7 In the light of discussion in foregoing paragraphs, it is abundantly
clear that the Respondent No. 1 is not going to support the allegations made in
the FIR and further continuation of investigation in the impugned FIR would
tantamount to the abuse of the process of the Law/Court. Since the
Respondent No. 1 is not going to support the allegations made in the FIR the
chances of conviction of the Petitioners would be remote and bleak. The entire
lgc 4 of 5
(25) cri.wp-394.21.odt
dispute arose out of matrimonial discord. In that view of the matter, the Writ
Petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed in
terms of prayer clause (i) which reads thus:-
(i) Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the impugned
Chargesheet filed in the Court of Metropolitan
Magistrate, 29th Court, Bhoiwada Dadar Mumbai dated
30/01/2019 in respect of FIR No.538/2016 dated
07/12/2016 filed U/s. 498A, 504, 506, 323, 34 of IPC,
1860 registered with Wadala T.T. Police Station."
8 Rule is made absolute to above extent and, the Writ Petition stands
disposed of accordingly. The parties shall strictly abide by the consent terms
and extend full cooperation to the Family Court, Bandra for early disposal of
the proceedings.
[MANISH PITALE, J] [S. S. SHINDE , J]
lgc 5 of 5
