Ritesh Arvind Shah And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 4176 Bom

           Digitally
           signed by
           Vishwanath                                1/5                   7-WP-4407-2017.doc
Vishwanath S. Sherla
S. Sherla  Date:
           2021.03.09
           10:31:51
           +0530                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4407 OF 2017

             1.       Mr. Ritesh Arvind Shah
                      Aged 34 years; Occ: Service.

             2.       Mr. Arvind Sobhagchand Shah
                      Aged 63 years, Occ: Retired.

             3.       Mrs. Neelam Arvind Shah
                      Aged 61 years, Occ: Housewife.
                      All resident of
                      Dhanashree Kunj, Block-B
                      2nd Floor, 46, Rupchand Mukherjee
                      Lane, Behind Bhowanipore Police
                      Station, Kolkata- 700025.                 ...PETITIONERS

                      Versus

             1.       The State of Maharashtra
                      Through Nerul Police Station
                      in C.R. No. 222 of 2017.

             2.    Mrs. Shweta Ritesh Shah
                   Flat No. 302, Balaji Krupa CHS
                   Plot 3-A, Sector 28,
                   Nerul (W), Navi Mumbai- 400 706.             ...RESPONDENTS
                                                  ...
             Ms. Deepika M Bafna for Petitioner.
             Mr. Amol A Patankar for Respondent No. 2.
             Smt. A.S. Pai, APP for State.
             Respondent No. 2 is present.
                                                  ...

                                            CORAM : S. S. SHINDE &
                                                     MANISH PITALE, JJ.

                                            DATE :     8th MARCH, 2021.




             Bhagyawant Punde
                                            2/5                        7-WP-4407-2017.doc




ORAL JUDGMENT [PER S.S. SHINDE, J.]

.                  Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners prays for leave to

amend. Leave granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the

consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Respondent

No. 2 submits that the parties have amicably settled the dispute. Learned

counsel for the Respondent No. 2 has tendered across the bar, affidavit of

Respondent No. 2, the same is taken on record. Paragraphs 1 to 7 of the said

affidavit are read as under:-

1. I say that I am the Ori. Complainant in C.R. No. 222 of 2017 registered with Nerul Police Station on 28.06.2017 for offences punishable under sections 498- A, 406, 323 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. I say that thereafter charge sheet came to be filed. The case is numbered as R.C.C. No. 499 of 201/8 which is now pending before the 9thJt. C.J.J.D. and JMFC Vashi, Navi Mumbai.

3. I say that after the intervention of respectable persons from of both sides to resolve the matrimonial dispute between the petitioner no. 1 and me the disputes have now been amicably resolved. I say that pursuant to the amicable settlement the Consent Terms dated 12/07/2019 have been executed between me

Bhagyawant Punde 3/5 7-WP-4407-2017.doc

and all the petitioners in the criminal writ petition 4407 of 2017. The copy of Consent Terms dated 12/07/2019 is annexed herewith.

4. I say that as per paragraph 3, sub clause C, of the aforesaid consent terms dated 12/07/2019 I have agreed to withdraw the case filed u/s 498(A) of the IPC which is registered with Nerul Police Station Navi Mumbai as CR no 222/2017 and is now pending before the 9thJt. C.J.J.D. and JMFC Vashi, Navi Mumbai as RCC No. 499 of 2018.

5. I say that as per the paragraph 3 of consent terms the petitioners have agreed to pay full and final alimony of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rs Fifteen Lakhs). I say that on execution of the consent terms, I have received Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rs. Five Lakhs) and today as per the consent terms I have received further payment of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rs Five Lakhs) by way of Demand Draft bearing no. 813224, dated 16/12/2020, drawn on Standard Chartered Bank. I say that the balance amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rs. Five Lakhs) will be paid before the Family Court on filing of the evidence for divorce by mutual consent.

6. I say that as per the consent terms dated 12/7/2019, I have no objection to allow the quashing of the CR No 222/2017 registered with Nerul Police Station Navi Mumbai and the case pending before the 9thJt. C.J.J.D. and JMFC Vashi, Navi Mumbai as RCC No. 499 of 2018 against all the petitioners in Criminal W.P. No. 4407 of 2017.

Bhagyawant Punde
                                            4/5                            7-WP-4407-2017.doc

7. I say that I am making this present Affidavit out of my free will and I further say that there is no coercion or force or threat in making the present Affidavit.

4. The Respondent No. 2 is present before this Court. She stated

that it is her voluntary act to enter into the settlement and join the prayer of

petitioners for quashing the proceedings arising out of RCC No. 499 of 2018

pending before the 9th Jt.C.J.J.D. and JMFC, Vashi, Navi Mumbai.

5. Since the parties have amicably settled the dispute and

Respondent No. 2 had joined the prayer of petitioners for quashing the

impugned FIR, no fruitful purpose will be served by continuing the further

proceedings arising out of RCC No. 499 of 2018 pending before the 9 th

C.J.J.D. and JMFC, Vashi, Navi Mumbai. Further continuation of aforesaid

proceedings would be an exercise in futility and tantamount to the abuse of

the process of the concerned court.

6. The Supreme Court in the case of Giansingh v. State of Punjab

and Another1 has held that, the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and

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 1 2012 (10) SCC 303

Bhagyawant Punde 5/5 7-WP-4407-2017.doc

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, to secure the

ends of justice and prevent the abuse of the process of the Court, the

petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.

The proceedings bearing RCC No. 499 of 2018 pending before the 9 th Jt.

C.J.J.D. & JMFC, Vashi, Navi Mumbai, arising out of FIR No. 222 of 2017

registered with Nerul Police Station on 28.06.2017 for offences punishable

under Sections 498-A, 406, 323 read with 34 of the IPC, stands quashed and

set aside. Rule made absolute to above extent. The writ petition stands

disposed of.

      ( MANISH PITALE, J.)                                   (S. S. SHINDE, J.)


Bhagyawant Punde