Puneet S/O Deepak Verma And 3 ... vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Police ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1036 Bom

         Judgment                          1                      apl111.22.odt




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


                    CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 111/2022


         1]    Puneet S/o Deepak Verma,
               Aged about 35 years, Occ. Service,

         2]    Mr. Deepak S/o Yashpal Verma,
               Aged about 67 years, Occ. Retired

         3]    Mrs. Meena W/o Deepak Verma,
               Aged about 62 years, Occ. Housewife

         4]    Suneet S/o Deepak Verma,
               Aged about 38 years, Occ. Service

               All Applicant Nos. 1 to 4 are
               R/o. House No. 2-61/33/17, Plot No. 17,
               East Anand Bag, Kalyan Nagar, CIEFL Colony,
               Malkajgiri, Hyderabad-47
                                                        .... APPLICANT(S)

                                     // VERSUS //

         1]    State of Maharashtra,
               Through Police Inspector,
               Imamwada Police Station, Nagpur

         2]    Mrs. Rakhee W/o Puneet Verma,
               Aged about 33 years, Occ. At present Nil,
               R/o. 13, Rajabaksha, Near Medical Square, Nagpur

                                                     .... NON-APPLICANT(S)




ANSARI
          Judgment                             2                        apl111.22.odt




         *******************************************************************

Ms. S.Paunikar, Advocate for the applicant(s) Shri S.S. Doifode, APP for the non-applicant/State Shri M.A. Gupta, Advocate for the non-applicant no. 2 *******************************************************************

CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE AND ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI JJ.

JANUARY 28, 2022

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER:- V.M. DESHPANDE, J.)

1] RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of the parties.

2] By filing this present application under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants are praying for quashing of

the F.I.R. No. 185/2015 registered with Police Station Imamwada for the

offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 354 and 34 of the Indian

Penal Code.

3] The marriage of the non-applicant no. 2 was performed with

the applicant No. 1 on 29/06/2012. The other applicants are the relatives

of the applicant No. 1. In their matrimony, discord was caused and the

ANSARI Judgment 3 apl111.22.odt

non-applicant no. 2 filed report against the applicants resulting into

registration of crime against them.

4] It is the submission of the learned advocates for the

applicants and the non-applicant no. 2 that in the meanwhile they have

amicably settled their dispute and they have filed the appropriate

proceedings before the Family Court. Learned advocate for the

applicants submitted that before the learned Judge, Family Court

compromise took place and in the Divorce Petition No. 685/2017, an

amount of Rs. 16,50,000/- is deposited by the applicant No. 1 in favour

of the non-applicant no. 2 as agreed.

5] The applicant No. 1 and the non-applicant No. 2 are

virtually present from the office of their respective advocates. On the

query being made by the Court to the non-applicant no. 2, she submitted

that in pursuance to the compromise in between the parties, the

applicant No. 1 has deposited an amount of Rs. 16,50,000/-. She also

submitted that since the dispute between the parties is settled, she is not

interested in prosecuting her complaint further.

ANSARI
          Judgment                            4                           apl111.22.odt




         6]          The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Abbot Vs.

State of Punjab reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, has held that when the

nature of dispute between the parties is of personal one and the parties

have settled their dispute, the Court should give approval to such

compromise so that the Court can devote that time to other matters.

7] In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) and as the parties have decided to bury

their dispute and lead their future life amicably, we are of the view that

this is a fit case wherein this Court exercises its inherent powers to give

the end to the prosecution which can be prejudicial to both the parties.

         8]          Hence, we pass the following order :-



                      (a)         The application is allowed.



                      (b)         F.I.R. No. 185/2015 registered with Imamwada

Police Station, Nagpur for the offences punishable under

ANSARI Judgment 5 apl111.22.odt

Sections 498A, 406, 354 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code

together with consequent R.C.C. No. 1799/2017 pending

on the file of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur are

quashed and set aside.

(c) Needless to mention that the non-applicant

no. 2 will be entitled to withdraw the amount of

Rs. 16,50,000/- deposited by the applicant No. 1 in the

divorce proceedings.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Pending

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

                                                 (JUDGE)                             (JUDGE)




   Signed By:AKRAM PARVEZ
   MAQSOOD AHMAD ANSARI
   Private Secretary to Hon'ble Judge
   Signing Date:28.01.2022 15:29

ANSARI