Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 144 (BOM)

Sanjay Jain v. State of Goa

2022-01-14

MANISH PITALE

body2022
JUDGMENT Manish Pitale, J. - There are three Writ Petitions for consideration before this Court. Two Writ Petitions filed by Sanjay Jain and the third petition is filed by Anju Jain. Parties were husband and wife and now they are divorced. During the period of matrimonial acrimony between the parties, there were criminal cases filed against each other resulting in registration of First Information Reports (FIRs). After a long drawn process of attempts at amicable settlement, the parties agreed by consent terms dated 3.5.2019, to put an end to their misery by agreeing to specific terms of settlement. On 21.10.2021, an addendum was added to the aforesaid consent terms dated 3.5.2019. As a consequence of the consent terms, the parties have taken steps in the matter. Since the Criminal cases initiated against each other can be quashed by invoking Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and Article 226 of the Constitution of India, both the parties are before this Court to give finality to the agreed terms between them. 2. Heard Mr. J. Supekar, learned Counsel for the petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition Nos. 22 of 2022 (Filing) and 23 of 2022(Filing) and Ms. A. Desai, learned Counsel for the petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2022(Filing), as also Mr. P. Faldessai, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondents in all petitions. Since the rival parties are represented through their Counsel, these Writ Petitions are taken up for disposal. 3. Clause XXIV of the consent terms dated 3.5.2019 executed between the parties reads as follows:- Both parties have filed various cognizable criminal complaints against each other and third parties alleging commission of non-compoundable offences against each other. Both parties agree that due to the amicable settlement of disputes between the Respondent and the Petitioner, both parties hereby agree to consent to the quashing of the criminal proceedings/First Information Reports pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Mapusa, Goa and the Porvorim Police Station, Mapusa Police Station or any other police station. Both parties shall furnish an Affidavit to each other giving no objection to the quashing of such criminal proceedings/FIR to be filed before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay at Goa. 4. In pursuance of the aforesaid clause of the consent agreement, these petitions have been filed for quashing of aforesaid criminal cases pending between the parties. Both parties shall furnish an Affidavit to each other giving no objection to the quashing of such criminal proceedings/FIR to be filed before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay at Goa. 4. In pursuance of the aforesaid clause of the consent agreement, these petitions have been filed for quashing of aforesaid criminal cases pending between the parties. The details of the said cases are as follows:- (1) Criminal case IPC No. 558/2018/A wherein petitioner Sanju Jain is the accused, pending before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mapusa for offences under Sections 324, 504, 506(ii) read with 34 of IPC. (2) Criminal case IPC No. 391/2018/F wherein petitioner Sanju Jain is the accused, pending before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mapusa for offences under Sections 279, 323 337 ,504, 506(ii) read with 34 of IPC. (3) Criminal case IPC No. 77/2019/C wherein petitioner Anju Jain is the accused, pending before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mapusa for offences under Sections 324 ,504, 506(ii) of IPC. (4) Criminal case IPC No. 356/2018 wherein petitioner Anju Jain is the accused, pending before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mapusa for offences under Sections 341 ,427, 504, 506(ii) read with 34 of IPC. 5. Since the Criminal cases essentially arose out of the matrimonial dispute between the parties and now that the parties have settled their inter se dispute and they do not wish to proceed with the criminal cases in terms of clause XXIV of the consent agreement quoted above, this Court is of the opinion that in the interest of justice, the present Writ Petitions deserve to be allowed in terms of prayer clauses in these Writ Petitions. 6. Accordingly, Criminal Writ Petition No. 22/2022/F, is allowed in terms of the prayer clause (a). Similarly, Criminal Writ Petition No. 23/2022/F, is allowed in terms of the prayer clause (a) and Criminal Writ Petition No. 30/2022/F, is also allowed in terms of the prayer clause (a). Consequently, the abovementioned criminal cases stand quashed. 7. Writ Petitions stand disposed of.