Tarannum Naaz Abu Bakar Bhatia And ... vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Akot Fail, ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 13471 Bom

          Judgment                             1                                 apl913.21.odt




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                             NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.


                         CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 913/2021


          1]       Tarannum Naaz Abu Bakar Bhatia,
                   Aged about 30 years, Occ. Household,

          2]       Abu Bakar Anis Ahmed Bhatia,
                   Aged about 36 years, Occ. Business

          3]       Anis Ahmad Mansoori Bhatia,
                   Aged about 75 years, Occ. Retired

          4]       Mohammad Afzal @ Guddu Anis Ahmad Bhatia,
                   Aged about 38 years, Occ. Business

          5]       Shabana Naaz Mohammad Firoz Shaikh,
                   Aged about 45 years, Occ. Nil,

                   Applicant Nos. 1 to 5 are R/o. Near
                   Shahana Masjid Gulab Nagar, Bahram Pura,
                   District Ahmadabad (Gujarat)

          6]       Jabeen W/o Shaikh Usman,
                   Aged about 40 years, Occ. Nil

          7]       Shaikh Usman S/o Shaikh Jumma,
                   Aged about 43 years, Occ. Labour

                   Nos. 6 & 7 R/o. Sontakke Plots,
                   Old City, Akola
                   Tq. & Dist. Akola
                                                                   .... APPLICANT(S)

                                         // VERSUS //


ANSARI



         ::: Uploaded on - 22/09/2021                   ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2021 23:01:34 :::
           Judgment                               2                               apl913.21.odt




                   State of Maharashtra,
                   Through Police Station Officer,
                   P.S. Akot File, Akola Dist. Akola
                                                          .... NON-APPLICANT(S)

           *******************************************************************
                        Shri S. Katkar, Advocate for the applicant(s)
                     Shri S.S. Doifode, APP for the non-applicant/State
           *******************************************************************

                             CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

SEPTEMBER 20, 2021

JUDGMENT : (PER:- AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)

1] Heard.

2] RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith.

3] By this application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, the applicants have jointly prayed for quashing the

F.I.R. No. 426/2020 registered by the applicant no. 1 against the

applicant nos. 2 to 7 with the non-applicant - Police Station for the

offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504 & 34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

ANSARI




           Judgment                                 3                                apl913.21.odt




          4]               The first information report came to be registered against the

applicant nos. 2 to 7 with the accusations that the applicant nos. 2 to 7

harassed the applicant no. 1 for non payment of dowry. During the

pendency of the investigation, the applicants have decided to mutually

resolve their dispute. The applicants have therefore jointly prayed for

quashing the first information report against the applicant nos. 2 to 7 by

filing the present application.

5] This Court on 06/09/2021 issued notice to the non-

applicant. The non-applicant - Investigating Agency, in pursuance of the

notice issued by this Court, has filed reply stating that the Investigating

Officer has recorded the statements of witnesses and the applicant no. 1 is

residing along with her husband and the parties have arrived at

settlement.

6] We have carefully considered the allegations in the first

information report and the reply filed by the the non-applicant. On

scrutiny of the allegations in the first information report, we are satisfied

that the offences alleged against the applicant nos. 2 to 7 are personal in

nature. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot

ANSARI

Judgment 4 apl913.21.odt

vs. State of Punjab reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582 has taken a view that it

is advisable that in disputes where the question involved is purely of a

personal nature, the Court should originally accept the terms of

compromise even in criminal proceeding as keeping the matter alive with

no possibility in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which Courts,

grossly over-burdened, as they are, cannot afford and that the time so

saved can be utilized in deciding more effective and meaningful

litigation.

7] In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in

the case of Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) and in view of the settlement

between the parties, we are satisfied that the first information report

against the applicant nos. 2 to 7 deserves to be quashed and set aside.

8] Hence, the following order:-

F.I.R. No. 426/2020 registered with the non-applicant -

Police Station against the applicant nos. 2 to 7 for the

offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504 & 34 of the

Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside.

ANSARI




           Judgment                               5                                 apl913.21.odt

Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Pending

application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

                            (JUDGE)                                (JUDGE)




ANSARI