Riyaz Inus Vora And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 992 Bom

                                                                        905-3889-2021-WP=.doc
          Digitally
          signed by
          UDAY         Uday S. Jagtap
UDAY      SHIVAJI
SHIVAJI   JAGTAP
          Date:
JAGTAP    2023.02.03
          18:26:25            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
          +0530




                                   CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3889 OF 2021

                       1. Mr. Riyaz Inus Vora
                       2. Mrs. Abida Inus Vora
                       3. Inus Abdul Vora
                       4. Nasreen Munshi W/o. Mohmad Munshi             .. Petitioners
                             Vs.
                       1. The State of Maharashtra
                       2. Mrs. Shazia Riyaz Vora                        .. Respondents

                                                        .....
                       Mr. Vishnu Bhatt i/b Mr. Navin D. Shrivastava for the petitioners
                       Mrs. P.P. Shinde, APP for the respondent - State
                       Ms. Shweta Agrawal for the respondent no.2
                                                        .....

                                                CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
                                                        PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, JJ.

DATED : 31st JANUARY, 2023.

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 final disposal. Learned

A.P.P waives notice on behalf of the respondent no.1 - State and

learned Counsel Ms. Agrawal waives notice on behalf of the

respondent No.2.

1 of 4 905-3889-2021-WP=.doc

3. By this petition, preferred under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India and Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioners

seek quashing of the FIR registered vide CR No.400 of 2017 with

the Naya Nagar Police Station, Thane for the alleged offences

punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian

Penal Code and consequently the proceeding, if any, pending before

the trial Court. Quashing is sought on the premise that the parties

have amicably settled their dispute.

4. Perused the papers. The petitioner no.1 is the husband of the

respondent no.2 and the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are the mother-in-

law and father-in-law respectively of the respondent no.2 and

respondent no.4 is the sister-in-law of the respondent no.2.

5. It appears that the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2

got married on 16.05.2014. It further appears that some time in

December 2017, the respondent no.2 left her matrimonial home.

The couple has a child, aged 8 years. As according to the

respondent no.2, she was allegedly ill-treated and harassed by the

petitioners, she lodged the aforesaid FIR as against them alleging

the aforesaid offences.

2 of 4 905-3889-2021-WP=.doc

6. After registration of the said C.R., the parties settled their

dispute and the respondent no.2 started living with the petitioner

no.1. We are informed that the respondent no.2 is living with the

petitioner no.1 - husband for the last 3 years.

7. Learned Counsel for the respondent no.2 has tendered an

affidavit of the respondent no.2 dated 30 th January, 2023, duly

affirmed before the Assistant Registrar, High Court. To the said

affidavit is annexed a photocopy of the Aadhar Card of the

respondent no.2, duly attested by her. In the said affidavit, the

respondent no.2 has stated that she has amicably settled the dispute

and is happily cohabiting with the petitioner no.1 since 2021. She

has stated that she no objection to the quashing of the FIR, which

was lodged by her on account of some misunderstanding. She has

also stated that the petitioner no.1's passport, which was seized by

the Police, be returned to the petitioner no.1. The said affidavit is

taken on record. Respondent no.2 is present in person. On being

questioned, she reiterates the contents of her affidavit. Learned

Counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 has identified the

respondent no.2 and the learned A.P.P has verified the original

Aadhar Card of the respondent no.2.

3 of 4 905-3889-2021-WP=.doc

8. Considering the nature of dispute, relations between the

parties, affidavit of respondent no.2 and the judgments of the Apex

Court in the matter of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 1 and

Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 2 , there is no

impediment in allowing the petition.

9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and C.R. No.400 of 2017

registered with the Naya Nagar Police Station and consequently the

proceeding, if any, pending before the trial Court are quashed and

set aside.

10. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms.

11. Needless to state that since we have quashed the FIR, the

Police to forthwith handover the passport of the petitioner no.1 to

him.

12. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

[PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]               [REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.]



1    (2012) 10 SCC 303
2    (2014) 6 SCC 466



                                                                   4 of 4