Sabari Ramasamy Karunkaran vs The State Of Maharashtra
2022 Latest Caselaw 9993 Bom

                                                                                 5. WP 945 of 2022.doc




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                     CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 945 OF 2022

                             Sabari Ramasamy Karunkaran                    ...Petitioner
                                      vs.

                             1. The State of Maharashtra

                             2. Susmita Sabri Ramasamy
                                (Susmita Kamble)                           ...Respondents

                                                           *****
                             Mr. Rahul B. Khot - Advocate for the Petitioner
                             Mrs. A. S. Pai, PP a/w Mrs. P. P. Shinde - APP for the
                             Respondent-State
                             Mr. Prasad Patil - Advocate for Respondent No. 2
                                                           *****
                                              CORAM :          REVATI MOHITE DERE &
                                                               S. M. MODAK, JJ.

                                             DATE :         29th SEPTEMBER, 2022


                             P. C. :-

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2 Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith, with the

consent of the parties and the petition is taken up for fnal

disposal. Learned P.P waives notice on behalf of the

Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Prasad Patil waives notice on

behalf of the Respondent No. 2.

SEEMA     Digitally signed
          by SEEMA
KSHITIJ   KSHITIJ YELKAR

YELKAR
          Date: 2022.10.01
          17:03:51 +0530     Seema                                                               1/5
                                                   5. WP 945 of 2022.doc




3         By this petition, the Petitioner seeks quashing of

the FIR, bearing C.R. No. 421 of 2015 registered with the

Chaturshringi Police Station, Pune, for the alleged ofences

punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 506 of the Indian

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

Petitioner and the Respondent No. 2 have amicably settled

their dispute.

4. Perused the papers. The Petitioner is the husband

of the Respondent No. 2. The Petitioner and the Respondent

No. 2 got married on 26/10/2015 at Residency Club, Pune

according to Hindu rites and customs. Post marriage, there

was marital discord between the parties, pursuant to which

the Respondent No. 2 fled a complaint/F.I.R. which was

registered vide C.R. No. 421 of 2015 as against the

Petitioner, with the Chaturshringi Police Station, for the

alleged ofences as stated aforesaid. After investigation,

charge-sheet was fled and the case is presently pending

before the learned JMFC, 9th Court, Pune, being RCC No.

Seema 2/5

5. WP 945 of 2022.doc

2304 of 2017.

5 It appears that in the interregnum, during the

pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the parties

amicably settled their dispute and entered into the Consent

Terms. The said Consent terms are at page no. 87, Exh. 'C'

of the petition. Admittedly, the Petitioner and the

Respondent No. 2 have no issues from the said wedlock. It

is agreed that the Petitioner pays a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- to

the Respondent No. 2, as full and fnal settlement/

permanent alimony/compensation. The Respondent No. 2 is

present in Court. She states that she has received the said

amount from the Petitioner.

6 Learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2 states

that the Respondent No. 2 has fled her afdavit and that

the same is at page no. 138 of the petition. The said

afdavit is not on our fle, though fled, record and hence,

learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2 has tendered a

xerox copy of the said afdavit-in-reply of the Respondent

Seema 3/5

5. WP 945 of 2022.doc

No. 2. As per the said afdavit, the Respondent No. 2 has

stated that she has no objection for quashing of the

aforesaid C.R., in view of the amicable settlement between

them. It is further stated that the parties had fled a

Divorce petition, seeking devorce by mutual consent,

before the learned Judge, Family Court, Pune and that the

said petition was allowed vide Judgment and Order dated

07/01/2022. Respondent no. 2 is present in-person. She re-

iterates what is stated by her in her afdavit. She states

that she has no objection for quashing of the aforesaid C.R..

She is identifed by her counsel. The Respondent No. 2 has

tendered a self attested xerox copy of her Aadhar card.

The same is taken on record. Learned APP has verifed the

original Aadhar card of the Respondent No. 2.

7 Considering the nature of dispute, relations

between the parties and consent terms entered into

between the parties and having regard to the judicial

pronouncements of the Apex Court in the case of Gian

Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr.1 and Narinder Singh 1 (2012) 10 SCC 303

Seema 4/5

5. WP 945 of 2022.doc

& Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr.2, there is no

impediment in allowing the petition.

8 The petition is accordingly allowed and the FIR

bearing C.R. No. 421/2015 registered with the Chaturshringi

Police Station, Pune is quashed and set aside and

consequently, the proceeding arising from the said C.R.

which is pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Pune, being

RCC No. 2304 of 2017, is also quashed and set-aside.

9 Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms.

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

10 All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of

this order.

        [S. M. MODAK, J.]         [REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.]




2   (2014) 6 SCC 466

Seema                                                                 5/5