Nilesh @ Keshav S/O Murlidhar More ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 13025 Bom

                                  1              30-apl-968-21j.odt



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

           CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 968 OF 2021

1. Nilesh @ Keshav S/o. Murlidhar More,
   Age: 28 years, Occ. Service,
   R/o. Pundalik Nagar Galli No. 9,
   Aurangabad.

2. Durgabai W/o. Murlidhar More,
   Age: 45 years, Occ. Household,
   R/o. Pundalik Nagar Galli No. 9,
   Aurangabad.

3. Murlidhar S/o. Sonaji More,
   Age: 50 years, Occ.
   R/o. Pundalik Nagar Galli No. 9,
   Aurangabad.

4. Mangala W/o. Rameshwar Pawar,
   Age 30 years, Occ.: Household,
   R/o. Pundalik Nagar Galli No. 9,
   Aurangabad.

5.   Guddi D/o. Shivaji Shinde,
     Age 18 years, Occ. Education,
     R/o. Pundalik Nagar Galli No. 9,
     Aurangabad.

6.   Jotsna W/o. Shivaji Shide,
     Age 40 years, Occ. Household,
     R/o. Pishor, Taluka Kannad,
     District Aurangabad.

7.   Shivaji S/o. Totaram Shinde,
     Age 45 years, Occ. Pvt. Service,
     R/o. Pishor, Taluka Kannad,
     District Aurangabad.

8.   Ajay S/o. Shivaji Shinde,
     Age 22 years, Occ. Education,
     R/o. Pishor, Taluka Kannad,
     District Aurangabad.
                                              2                              30-apl-968-21j.odt



9.    Surekha W/o. Prashant Sathe,
      Age 34 years, Occ. Household,
      R/o. Pishor, Taluka Kannad,
      District Aurangabad.

10. Sarla W/o. Murlidhar More,
    Age 23 years, Occ. Household,
    R/o. Pundalik Nagar Galli No. 9,
   Aurangabad.                                                         . . . APPLICANTS

                    // V E R S U S //

1. The State of Maharashtra
   copy to be served on the
   Public Prosecutor, High Court of Bombay
   bench at Nagpur.
   (Through Umarkhed Police Station,
    Tq. Umarkhed, District Yeotmal).

2. Komal @ Shevanta W/o. Nilesh More,
   Age 23 years, Occ. Household,
   R/o. Pundalik Nagar, Aurangabad
   Galli No. 9, Aurangabad.

     At present R/o. Chatari,
     Tah. Umerkhed, District Yeotmal.                            . . . NON-APPLICANTS

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri        N. S. Ghanekar a/w. Shri Sharakuh Shah, Advocates for
applicants.
Shri I. J. Damle, APP for non-applicant no. 1/State.
Shri R. D. Narkhede h/f. Shri J. S. Wankhede, Advocate for non-
applicant no. 2.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                CORAM :-         SUNIL B. SHUKRE &
                                 M. W. CHANDWANI, JJ.

                DATED :-         14.12.2022

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.):-
                                  3                      30-apl-968-21j.odt



             Heard.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of the parties.

3. The learned counsel for the applicants and learned

counsel for non-applicant no. 2 (wife) both submit that dispute

existing between the husband and wife, which was of matrimonial

nature, was amicably settled by them and both of them have agreed to

withdraw the reports and proceedings filed against each other. They

further submit that both the husband and wife have filed a petition for

divorce by mutual consent and it is decreed by Family Court,

Aurangabad. They relied on the true copy of the decree of divorce

granted by Family Court, Aurangabad at page no. 75 of the application

and submit that the terms of the settlement are acceptable to both the

husband and wife and also to the relatives of the husband.

4. Learned APP submits that the appropriate orders may be

passed in the matter.

5. In view of above, we find that nothing has remained in the

criminal proceedings launched against the applicants at the behest of

non-applicant no. 2 and now, in view of the mutual settlement in 4 30-apl-968-21j.odt

between the husband and wife and also the decree of divorce granted

by Family Court, Aurangabad, it is necessary to allow the application

for preventing the abuse of process of the Court.

6. The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B),

which reads as under:-

"B) That, proceedings in R.C.C. No. 200 of 2018 pending before Learned J.M.F.C. at Umarkhed tq. Umarkhed District Yeotmal for offences punishable under section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code in crime no. 0598 of 2017 registered with Umarkhed Police Station, District Yeotmal may kindly be quashed and set aside."

7. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

(M. W. CHANDWANI, J.) (SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)

Digitally signed by JAISWAL JAISWAL RAJNESH RAMESH RAJNESH Date:

RAMESH 2022.12.14 18:27:59 +0530

RR Jaiswal