Prasanna Jaiprakash Shinde And ... vs The State Of Maharasthra And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 12545 Bom

NISHA           Digitally signed by
                NISHA SANDEEP
SANDEEP         CHITNIS
                Date: 2022.12.08
CHITNIS         12:55:21 +0530

                                                                                       2-apl.92.2018.doc


                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                            CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.92 OF 2018

                     1.               Prasanna Jaiprakash Shinde
                     2.               Jayashri Jaiprakash Shinde
                     3.               Prasad Jaiprakash Shinde
                     4.               Rajashri Devanand Kadam
                     5.               Devanand Bhimrao Kadam                        ...Applicants
                                           Versus
                     1.               State of Maharashtra
                     2.               Snehal Prasanna Shinde                        ...Respondents

                     Mr. Anand S. Shalgaonkar, for the Applicants.

                     Mr. J. P. Yagnik, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1- State.

                     Mr. Tapan Thatte, for the Respondent No.2.

                                                        CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
                                                                PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, JJ.

                                                        DATE       : 5th DECEMBER 2022

                    P.C. :

                    1.                     Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith, with the consent

of the parties and is taken up for final disposal. Learned A.P.P waives

N. S. Chitnis 1/7 2-apl.92.2018.doc

notice on behalf of the respondent No.1-State. Mr. Thatte waives

notice on behalf of the respondent No.2.

3. By this application, preferred under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants seek quashing of the FIR

bearing C.R. No.668 of 2017 registered with the Nigadi Police

Station, Pune, at the behest of the respondent No.2, for the alleged

offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the

Indian Penal Code. Quashing is sought on the premise, that the

parties have amicably settled their dispute and the respondent No.2

has no objection to the quashing of the said proceeding.

4. On 14th October 2022, the learned counsel for the

applicants had submitted that the matter had been amicably settled

between the applicant No.1 and the respondent No.2 by entering into

the consent terms before the Family Court, Pune. Learned Counsel

for the applicants had also submitted that one of the terms in the

consent terms was that the respondent No.2 will give her no objection

N. S. Chitnis 2/7 2-apl.92.2018.doc

for quashing the aforesaid C.R. Learned Counsel had relied on the

consent terms, which are at page 15 of the additional affidavit filed by

the applicants and submitted that the applicants had complied with the

consent terms, by returning the respondent No.2's articles and by

making payments, as stipulated in the consent terms. He had further

submitted that divorce by mutual consent was also obtained.

5. Since, according to the learned counsel for the respondent

No.2, the respondent No.2 was not responding, despite making

several calls to her, we thought it appropriate, having regard to the

submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants, to

direct the concerned officer of the Nigadi Police Station, to visit the

respondent No.2's house and to record her statement, as to whether

she had signed the consent terms dated 2 nd February 2020, before the

learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Pune, in Marriage Petition

No.245 of 2020, and whether she has no objection to the quashing of

the aforesaid C.R, registered at her behest with the Nigadi Police

Station, Pune, alleging the aforesaid offences. We had also directed

N. S. Chitnis 3/7 2-apl.92.2018.doc

the concerned officer to place on record, the statement of the

respondent No.2 duly signed by her, as well as, her identitiy proof.

We had recorded the said submissions in our order dated 14 th October

2022 and had accordingly, given the aforesaid directions.

6. Pursuant thereto, the learned APP has tendered the

statement of the respondent No.2 dated 16 th November 2022. To the

said statement is annexed the photocopy of the aadhar card of the

respondent No.2. The statement of the respondent No.2's father

dated 16th November 2022 alongwith the photocopy of his aadhar

card, is also produced before us.

7. Perused the papers. The applicant No.1 is the husband of

the respondent No.2; the applicant No.2 is the mother-in-law; the

applicant No.3, the brother-in-law; the applicant No.4, the sister-in-

law respectively of the respondent No.2 and the applicant No.5 is the

applicant No.4's husband. It appears that the applicant No.1 and the

respondent No.2 got married on 20 th January 2017. As there was

N. S. Chitnis 4/7 2-apl.92.2018.doc

marital discord between the parties, and as according to the

respondent No.2, she was ill-treated and harrassed by the applicants,

she lodged the aforesaid FIR, as against the applicants, alleging the

aforesaid offences. We are informed that till date charge-sheet has not

been filed in the said case.

8. In the interregnum, it appears that the parties amicably

settled their dispute and entered into consent terms. Pursuant to the

consent terms, the parties i.e. the applicant No.1 and the respondent

No.2 filed a petition seeking divorce by mutual consent, being

Marriage Petition No.245 of 2020, before the learned Civil Judge

Senior Division, Pune, which came to be allowed and disposed of vide

Judgment and Order dated 15th February 2021. Accordingly, a decree

of divorce by mutual consent was granted.

9. Since, the respondent No.2 was not appearing before this

Court and since, even the counsel for the respondent No.2 had no

instructions, we directed the police to record the statement of the

N. S. Chitnis 5/7 2-apl.92.2018.doc

respondent No.2 on the last date i.e. on 14 th October 2022. A perusal

of the statement of the respondent No.2 recorded by the police shows

that she has been divorced by mutual consent and that pursuant to her

divorce, she has re-married. She has also given her no objection to the

quashing of the said case, initiated at her behest. The statement of the

respondent No.2's father - Vishnu Pol, is on identical lines. Both the

said statements have been signed by the respondent No.2 and her

father respectively. To their statements are also annexed the

photocopy of their aadhar cards, duly attested by them. The same are

taken on record and marked 'X colly.' for identification.

10. Considering the nature of dispute, the amicable settlement

between the parties i.e. consent terms entered into between the

applicant No.1 and the respondent No.2, the statement of the

respondent No.2 recorded by the police and having regard to the

judicial pronouncements of the Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of

Punjab and Another1 and Narinder Singh and Others vs. State of

1 (2012) 10 SCC 303

N. S. Chitnis 6/7 2-apl.92.2018.doc

Punjab and Another2, there is no impediment in allowing the

application.

11. The application is accordingly allowed and the FIR bearing

C.R. No.668 of 2017 registered with the Nigadi Police Station, Pune,

is quashed and set-aside.

12. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. Application

is disposed of accordingly.

13. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this

order.

PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

2   (2014) 6 SCC 466

N. S. Chitnis                                                                       7/7