Quashed

Jitendra Rangnath Adake and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC3 Apr 2006APPLN/316/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order quashed a criminal complaint filed under Sections 498A, 504, and 506 IPC. The parties had settled their disputes via a divorce deed and mutual consent petition, agreeing to withdraw criminal cases and receive maintenance.

What did the court decide?

Rule made absolute and criminal complaint quashed based on mutual settlement and withdrawal consent between parties.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda Court’s or Judge’s orders. of Coram, appearance, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.S.A. Rajeshirke for the Applicant. Mr.V.Z. Kankaria for the Respondent No.2. Mr.G.P.Mulekar, APP. for the State. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE,J. DATED : 3/4/2006. P.C. 1. Heard both sides. 2. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. 3. The applicant No.1 and respondent No.2-Vaishali were husband and wife and had matrimonial disputes. The wife respondent No.2 filed a complaint against three applicants in Sarkarwada Police Station alleging offences U/s.498A,504, 506, 323 read with 34 of the I.P.C. and the same was registered

by the said police station under C.R.No.91/2002. After investigation, police filed charge sheet and Regular Criminal Case No.594 of 2002 was registered in the Court of J.M.F.C. Nashik. Pending disposal of the case, the husband and wife decided to settle their disputes and executed a divorce deed dated 20.4.2005 and thereafter, even filed divorce petition for grant of divorce by mutual consent in the civil court being Hindu Marriage Petition No.149 of 2005. Under the divorce deed the applicant No.1 had agreed to pay lumpsum amount of Rs.65,000/- as maintenance to the wife. Both the parties had agreed to withdraw criminal as well as civil cases against each other including the present criminal case and an application for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.

to settle the matter. He has no objection if the said criminal complaint is quashed. In this view of the matter, no further purpose will be served by continuing the criminal case in question and thus, rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b). Petition stands disposed off.

Jitendra Rangnath Adake and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Rangnath Adake and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Hangorani Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ashok Fulchand Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vijay Vasant Sanglikar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Jivaram Ganeshram Choudhary Vs the State of Maharashtra

M/S. N. Vensimal International Vs M/S. Indian Technical Institute and Anr.

Mehul Shah Gopaldas Shah Vs Bombay Municipal Corporation of Gr. Bombay and Anr.