Bombay High Court
Daksha Kunal Mayekar vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 23 February, 2022
Bench: S.S. Shinde, N. R. Borkar
1/5 11-APL-1337-2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1337 OF 2021
Mrs. Daksha Kunal Mayekar
Age: 21 years, Occ: Service
Residing at 14-B, Konkan Nagar Lt,
Dilip Gupta Road, Mahim,
Mumbai-400 016. ...Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Goregaon Police Station.
2. Mr. Datta Maruti Gurle
Age: 54 years, occ: Residing at
Room No.9, Kranti nagar, Kolsevadi Chawl,
Behram Baugh Road, Jogeshwari (West),
Mumbai 400 102 ...Respondents
...
Mr. Viral Rathod i/b Mr. Paresh V. More for Applicant.
Mr. Nemeel Mehta for Respondent No.2.
Ms. S. D. Shinde, APP for State.
Applicant present in Court.
Respondent No.2 present in Court.
...
Digitally signed
CORAM : S. S. SHINDE &
by
DNYANESHWAR
DNYANESHWAR ASHOK ETHAPE
ASHOK ETHAPE
N. R. BORKAR, JJ.
Date:
2022.02.24
13:30:55 +0530
DATE : 23rd FEBRUARY, 2022.
ORAL JUDGMENT.:
1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to
amend the prayer clause (A). Leave granted. Amendment to be carried out
forthwith.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the
consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.
Dnyaneshwar Ethape, PA
2/5 11-APL-1337-2021.doc
3. Learned counsel for the applicant and 2nd respondent jointly
submits that the parties have amicably settled the dispute. Learned counsel
appearing for the 2nd respondent has tendered the across bar, affidavit in
reply on behalf of respondent No.2, same is taken on record.
4. Respondent No.2 is present before this Court. He stated that it
is voluntary act to enter into such settlement and give consent for quashing
the FIR. He submits that he has received amount of compensation from the
applicant as amount in MACT proceeding and he has no objection for
quashing the impugned FIR. Paragraphs 2 to 5 of his affidavit reads as
under:-
"2. I say that after filing of the FIR much water has
been flown from the date of the registration of the
FIR, I have buried over my differences with the
Applicant and have voluntarily reached an amicable
settlement out of Court with the Applicant. I say
that I have received on 23.02.2022 a sum of Rs.
1,25,000/- in cash from the Applicant towards the
compensation in addition to the compensation of
Rs. 93,192/- received in MACT proceedings and the
said MACT proceedings is settled too.
3. I say that considering the young age of
the Applicant and her future I am not desirous of
continuing with the criminal proceedings against
her and have therefore decided to put an end to the
criminal proceedings in CR No. 524 of 2017.
4. I say that contents of the FIR and charge
Dnyaneshwar Ethape, PA
3/5 11-APL-1337-2021.doc
sheet are not been substantiated and in any case in
view of this affidavit and also out of the amicable
settlement. I say that the FIR and chargesheet is
now devoid of any force and I have no objection if
the FIR, Chargesheet and criminal proceedings
bearing Police Case No. 574/PS/2018 be quashed
against the Applicant.
5. I say that I have no objection if the FIR,
Chargesheet and criminal proceedings bearing
Police Case No. 574/PS/2018 pending on the file of
67th Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Borivali
Mumbai be quashed against the Applicant."
5. In view of the amicable settlement arrived at between the
parties, no fruitful purpose will be served by continuing the further
investigation of FIR No. 524 of 2017 registered with Goregaon Police
Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338
and 427 of the IPC.
6. In case said proceedings are continued, would amount to
exercise in futility since the chances of the conviction of the applicant would
be bleak. The Supreme Court in the case of Giansingh vs. State of Punjab
and Another1 has held that, the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and
predominatingly 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
1 2012 (10) SCC 303
Dnyaneshwar Ethape, PA
4/5 11-APL-1337-2021.doc
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 guideline engrafted in such power viz.: (I) to secure the
ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court.
7. In the light of discussion in foregoing paragraphs and in order
to prevent the abuse of the process of Law/Court and to secure the ends of
justice, in our view, it would be appropriate to allow the prayer of the
Applicant for quashing and setting aside the impugned FIR. Accordingly, we
pass the following order:
(i) The Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer
clause (A) and the Criminal Proceedings in Police Case No.
574/PS/2018 pending on the file of 67th Metropolitan
Magistrate Court, Borivali, Mumbai and Police Case No. 574/
Dnyaneshwar Ethape, PA
5/5 11-APL-1337-2021.doc
PS/2018 in connection with CR No. 524 of 2017 against the
Applicant registered at Goregaon Police Station, Mumbai for
the offence punishable under sections 279, 337, 338 and
427 of the Indian Penal Code, is quashed and set aside.
8. Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(N. R. BORKAR, J.) (S. S. SHINDE, J.)
Dnyaneshwar Ethape, PA
