Bombay High Court
Palash S/O Purushottam Darokar ... vs State Of Mah. Thr. Its Pso Ps ... on 22 July, 2022
Bench: S.B. Shukre, G. A. Sanap
APL.947.22
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
...
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 947/2022
1) Palash s/o Purushotam Darokar and others ..Applicants
versus
1) The State of Maharashtra & another ..Respondents
.............................................................................................................
Mr. R.R.Prajapati, Advocate for Applicants
Mr. M.J.Khan, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1
Ms. Renuka Sirpurkar, Advocate for Respondent No.2
..........................................................................................................
CORAM: SUNIL B. SHUKRE &
G.A. SANAP, JJ
DATED : 22nd July, 2022.
P.C. :
Heard.
2. Perused the Application and the affidavit-in-reply filed
by the Respondent No.2. We have also gone through the judgment
and order dated 13 th June, 2022 delivered in a petition filed under
section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the learned
Judge, Family Court No.4, Nagpur.
3. The judgment of the Family Court shows that now the
marriage between the applicant No.1 and Respondent No.2 has
been dissolved by the decree of divorce passed on the basis of
mutual consent of the parties to the marriage. The allegations made
APL.947.22
in the FIR indicate that there was an internecine matrimonial
dispute between the applicant no.1 on one hand and respondent
No.2 on the other, the heat of which was also felt by the applicant
Nos.2,3,4 and 5. But now with the dissolution of the marriage
and also the withdrawal of the allegations by respondent no.2, the
matrimonial dispute has been virtually extinguished, and now there
is also settlement reached between the parties. In any case, the
dispute does not have and can never have any public dispute
characteristic. We are, therefore, inclined to allow the Application.
4. Apart from what is stated above, the applicant Nos. 1
to 4 who are personally present before the Court and who have been
identified by their learned counsel and also the learned counsel for
respondent no.2 have stated that the settlement has been reached
between the parties amicably and voluntarily.
5. The learned APP submits that an appropriate order in
the matter be passed.
6. In view of the above, the Application is allowed in terms
of prayer clause (i) which reads as under:-
(i) Quash and set aside the FIR lodged by the non-
applicant no.2 under section 498A, 323, 294, 504, 506,
34 of IPC r/w. Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(5a) of
Prevention of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
APL.947.22
(Atrocity) Act with the non-applicant no.1 against
applicant No.1 to 5 on 30.6.2021 bearing FIR No.
282/2021 and final charge-sheet dt. 6.10.2021 bearing
No. 82/2021, registered as Special Case no.560/2021
(Annexure A) pending before learned District Judge-10
and ASJ Nagpur."
[G.A. SANAP, J.] [SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.]
sahare
Digitally Signed ByNARENDRA
BHAGWANTRAO SAHARE
Location:
Signing Date:22.07.2022 16:52
