Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 295 (BOM)

Puneet v. State of Maharashtra

2022-01-28

ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, V.M.DESHPANDE

body2022
JUDGMENT V.M. Deshpande, J. - 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 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. 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. 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 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.