Bombay High Court
Ravindra S/O Krushnarao Dongre ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 28 October, 2021
Bench: M.S. Sonak, Pushpa V. Ganediwala
13APL 1083-2021.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1083 OF 2021
1. Ravindra s/o Krushnarao Dongre,
aged about 52 years, Occ. Service.
2. Krushnarao s/o Chandrabhanji Dongre,
aged about 79 years, Occ. Retired.
3. Lilabai w/o Krushnarao Dongre,
aged about 72 years, Occ. Household.
4. Bharti w/o Ravindra Dongre,
aged about 42 years, Occ. Service.
All are R/o Saraswati Nagar, Lane No.3,
Amravati.
...APPLICANTS
Versus
State of Maharashtra,
Through P.S.O. Gadge Nagar,
Tahsil & District - Amravati.
...RESPONDENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri M.R. Joharapurkar, Advocate for the applicants.
Shri S.M. Ghodeswar, A.P.P. for the respondent/ State.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : M.S. SONAK AND
PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.
DATED : 28/10/2021
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.)
Heard.
::: Uploaded on - 29/10/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 30/10/2021 03:44:18 :::
13APL 1083-2021.odt
2
2. Admit.
3. Shri S.M. Ghodeswar, learned A.P.P., waives service of
notice on behalf of the respondent/ State.
4. This is a joint application filed by the accused and the
complainant under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
seeking quashment of the First Information Report No. 415/2009
registered with the Police Station, Gadge Nagar, District - Amravati
for the offence punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34
of the Indian Penal Code, so also the chargesheet bearing No.
3/2010, as also the consequent criminal proceedings bearing
Regular Criminal Case No. 300018/2010, pending on the file of the
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.9, Amravati.
5. It is stated that the matrimonial dispute between
applicant No.1 - the husband and applicant No.4 - the wife
(complainant) has been amicably settled long back and the couple
is residing peacefully since last ten years. Applicant Nos. 2 and 3
are the relatives of applicant No.1.
6. It is further stated that in the wake of anger, applicant
No.4 lodged a report against applicant Nos.1 to 3 with the Gadge
Nagar Police Station, Amravati, on the basis of which the aforesaid
crime came to be registered for the offence as above, which was
followed by chargesheet No. 3/2010, which was further registered
as Regular Criminal Case No. 300018/2010 and which is now
pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.9,
Amravati.
::: Uploaded on - 29/10/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 30/10/2021 03:44:18 :::
13APL 1083-2021.odt
3
7. Shri Joharapurkar, learned counsel for the applicants
urged to quash and set-aside the chargesheet and the consequent
criminal proceedings arose out of the said chargesheet.
8. It is further stated that with the intervention of the
elders, common friends and respectable persons of the Society, the
matter has been amicably settled between the parties.
9. Today, the applicants are personally present before this
Court. The learned counsel for the applicants acknowledges their
identity. Applicant No.4 states that she wants to withdraw all the
allegations, proceedings and report filed by her against applicant
Nos.1 to 3, and that the parties have no grudge against each other.
10. In this context, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another , (2003) 4
SCC 675, in paragraphs 14 and 15, has held as under :
"14. There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter
XX-A containing Section 498-A in the Indian Penal Code was
to prevent torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives
of her husband. Section 498-A was added with a view to
punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture
the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful
demands of dowry. The hypertechnical view would be
counterproductive and would act against interests of women
and against the object for which this provision was added.
There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power
to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would
prevent women from setting earlier. That is not the object of
Chapter XX-A of the Indian Penal Code.
15. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the High
Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal
proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code
does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the
Code."
::: Uploaded on - 29/10/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 30/10/2021 03:44:18 :::
13APL 1083-2021.odt
4
11. In the background of facts as aforesaid, so also relying on
the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as above, we are
inclined to allow the application and hence, we pass the following
order:-
ORDER
i. The Criminal Application is allowed.
ii. The First Information Report No. 415/2009, registered
with the Police Station, Gadge Nagar, District - Amravati for the
offence punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, so also the chargesheet bearing No. 3/2010, as
also the consequent criminal proceedings bearing Regular Criminal
Case No. 300018/2010, pending on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Court No.9, Amravat, are quashed and set-
aside.
(PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.) (M.S. SONAK, J.)
Sumit
