Akshita W/O. Rohan Patole And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra
2021 Latest Caselaw 7331 Bom

Dusane                                  1/7               apl 278.2021.doc

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                        CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.278 OF 2021



     1] Smt. Akshita w/o Rohan Patole,                )
     Aged about 29 years,                             )
     Occupation: Service, R/o. C/o. Prakash D.        )
     Pawar, Quarter No. M-01, V.N.I.T. Campus,        )
     Bajaj Nagar, Nagpur, Tah. and Dist. Nagpur.      )
                                                      )
     2] Shri Rohan S/o Himmatrao Patole,
     Aged 31 years, Occupation: Private Service.      )
                                                      )
     3] Smt. Rajani W/o Himmantrao Patole,            )
     Aged about 54 years, Occ. Housewife.             )
                                                      )
     4] Shri Himmatrao S/o Jagatrao Patole,           )
     Aged about 62 years, Occ. Retired.               )
                                                      )
     Applicant No.2 to 4 resident of Plot no.115,     )
     Priti Housing Society, Koradi Road, Bokhara,     )
     Tah. and Dist Nagpur.                            )
                                                      )
     5] Smt. Pooja W/o Yogesh Kale,                   )
     Aged about 29 years, Occ: Housewife,             )
     resident of Plot no.10, Flat No.6, Varad         )
     Vinayak Alankar Apartment, Garkheda,             )
     Aurangabad, Tah. and Dist Aurangabad             ) .....Applicants

                     Versus

     State of Maharashtra                             )
     through Police Station Officer,                  )
     Police Station Chatushrungi, Pune City,          )
     Tah. and Dist. Pune.                             ) ..... Respondent.



         ::: Uploaded on - 06/05/2021               ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 10:53:44 :::
 Dusane                                         2/7                apl 278.2021.doc




     Mr. Anish Khandekar for Applicants.
     Petitioner No. 1 present through VC and interacted.
     Mr. Deepak Thakre, PP a/w Mr. S.R. Shinde, APP for State.

                                         Coram : S.S. SHINDE AND
                                                 MANISH PITALE, JJ.

Judgment reserved on 4/5/2021 Judgment pronounced on 6/5/2021

JUDGMENT: (Per Manish Pitale, J.)

1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure jointly filed by the original informant and the

accused for quashing of Regular Criminal Case No. 3249 of 2019,

pending before the J.M.F.C., Pune, at the behest of Applicant No. 1

against Applicant Nos. 2 to 5 for the offences under Sections 498-A,

323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. The Applicants

are praying for quashing of the said criminal case by consent, in view of

the fact that after filing of charge-sheet before the said Court, the

parties settled their dispute amicably.

2. The Applicant No. 1 is the wife of Applicant No. 2 and the

Applicant Nos. 3 and 4 are the mother-in-law and father-in-law of

Dusane 3/7 apl 278.2021.doc

Applicant No.1, while Applicant No. 5 is married sister-in-law of

Applicant No. 1. On account of complaint lodged by Applicant No. 1,

offences were registered against Applicant Nos. 2 to 5. Upon

completion of investigation, charge-sheet was also filed against

Applicant Nos. 2 to 5.

3. Since the genesis of the criminal case initiated by the

Applicant No. 1 was a matrimonial dispute between Applicant Nos. 1

and 2, the parties with passage of time decided to settle their dispute

and to approach the Family Court at Nagpur with consent terms.

Initially, the divorce petition filed before the Family Court at Nagpur

was on the basis of allegations made by Applicant No. 2, but in view of

settlement between the parties, the same was converted into a petition

for grant of divorce by mutual consent.

4. Consent terms were filed before the Family Court at Nagpur

recording the terms of settlement between the parties. The Applicant

No. 2 has already deposited an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- in the said

Court, which the Applicant No. 1 would be entitled to withdraw upon

Dusane 4/7 apl 278.2021.doc

disposal of the petition for divorce by mutual consent. On the basis of

the settlement between the parties, the present application has been

filed for quashing of the said criminal case.

5. The Applicants were represented through their Counsel, Mr.

Anish Khandekar and Mr. Deepak Thakre, learned P.P. appeared on

behalf of the Respondent-State. The Applicant No.1 (original

informant) joined the hearing through Video Conferencing. She was

identified by the learned counsel appearing for the Applicants and she

stated that she voluntarily entered into settlement with Applicant No. 2

to 5 for quashing of criminal case, in view of settlement of dispute

between the parties. The learned counsel appearing for the Applicants

also invited attention of this Court to the Consent Terms placed on

record before the Family Court at Nagpur. The Applicants undertake to

abide by such consent terms.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Giansingh v.

State of Punjab and Another, reported in 1 2012 (10) SCC 303 has held

that, the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominatingly

Dusane 5/7 apl 278.2021.doc

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

resolved 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

guidelines engrafted in such power viz.: 1) to secure the ends of justice,

or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court.

7 Applying the ratio of aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court to the facts of the present case, we are of the opinion

Dusane 6/7 apl 278.2021.doc

that, the present application deserves to be allowed, in view of the fact

that the dispute between the parties in the present case essentially

arose out of matrimonial discord between the Applicant Nos. 1 and 2.

Since the dispute has been settled and the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 are in

the process of obtaining decree for divorce by mutual consent, no

purpose would be served if the aforesaid criminal case is permitted to

continue. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the present application

deserves to be allowed.

8. Accordingly, the application is allowed in terms of prayer

clause (a), which reads as follows :

"i) quash the proceeding of the Regular Criminal Case

No. 3249/2019 State of Maharashtra Vs. Rohan Patole

& Others, pending before the learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Court No. 9, Shivajinagar, Pune

for offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 and

34 of Indian Penal Code, in view of the facts stated

above and in the interest of justice and equity;".

Dusane 7/7 apl 278.2021.doc

9. The Applicants are directed to abide by the Consent Terms

filed before the Family Court at Nagpur and to attend the proceedings

before the said Court in the pending petition for grant of divorce by

mutual consent.

10. The Application stands allowed in above terms.

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