Allowed

Sayara Begum Shaikh Kalim and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC21 Nov 2013APPLN/750/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The Court held that since the underlying matrimonial dispute was amicably settled and consent terms filed in the Family Court were complied with, continuing the prosecution was improper.

What did the court decide?

Application under inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings allowed in terms of prayer A.

Sayara Begum Shaikh Kalim and Another Vs the State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

Cri.Appln750.13.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 750 OF 2013

¶5

Sayara Begum W/o Shaikh Kalim and another

¶6

.. APPLICANTS

¶7

-VERSUS-

¶8

The State of Maharashtra and others.

¶9

.. RESPONDENTS

¶10

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. B.R. Warma APP for Respondent No.1 : Mr. V.P. Kadam Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. M.V. Haque

¶11

CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. Dated: November 21, 2013

¶12

ORAL ORDER :-

¶13

The applicants are the accused in Sessions

¶14

Case No. 107 of 2012, which is in respect of
offences punishable under section 498A of the
Indian Penal Code (IPC), section 307 of IPC,
section 323 of IPC etc., as also offences
punishable under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶15

The applicants had made an application for
discharge, as contemplated under section 227 of

¶16

2 Cri.Appln750.13.odt

¶17

the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”), but the said application was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, by an order dated 03.10.2012 holding, inter alia , that there were sufficient grounds for proceeding against the applicants.

¶18

Being aggrieved thereby, the applicants

¶19

have approached this Court by filing present
application invoking inherent powers of this
Court.

¶20

2.Though a number of contentions have been

¶21

raised in the application, basically, the
proceedings against the applicants are sought to
be got quashed on the ground that the matter has

¶22

been amicably settled between the parties. It is
submitted that the matrimonial dispute between the

¶23

respondent no.2 and her husband Javedkhan has
already been settled and consent terms have been

¶24

filed in the Family Court. Mr. Warma, the learned
counsel for the applicants submitted that as per

¶25

Cri.Appln750.13.odt

¶26

¶27

the consent terms, the respondent no.2 had agreed
to withdraw the criminal prosecution filed against
the respondent no.2A and his relatives.

¶28

3.When this contention was advanced, it

¶29

was noticed that the respondent no.2 had not been
appearing before this Court. The consent terms
indicated that the respondent no.2 was to withdraw

¶30

the criminal prosecution against her husband and
in-laws, `on being satisfied that they would treat
her properly.’

¶31

4.Under these circumstances, by filing

¶32

Criminal Application No. 5999/2013, it is
submitted before me that the respondent no.2 is
now ready to give effect to the said settlement.

¶33

5.I have carefully considered the matter

¶34

in the light of the averments in Criminal
Application No. 5999/2013. I have heard the
learned counsel for the respondent No.2, who has
been joined as the applicant no.3 in Criminal

¶35

Cri.Appln750.13.odt

¶36

¶37

Application No. 5999/2013.

¶38

6.Considering the nature of the dispute,

¶39

which is basically a matrimonial dispute and the
fact that the dispute between the husband and
wife has already been settled, and that, they are
residing together, it would be proper to give
effect to the consent terms that have been filed
by the respondent no.2 and the respondent No.2A
before the Family Court. Since the matrimonial
dispute is resolved satisfactorily, and terms
thereof have been mentioned in the Family Court,
it would be essential to give effect to the
settlement that has been arrived at. It would be
highly improper to permit the prosecution to be
continued under these circumstances.

¶40

7.It is well settled that the inherent

¶41

powers of this Court are wide enough to quash a
prosecution based on the compromise arrived at
between the parties in appropriate cases,
irrespective of whether the offences in question

¶42

Cri.Appln750.13.odt

¶43

¶44

are compoundable or non-compoundable.

¶45

8.Underthesecircumstances,the

¶46

application is allowed in terms of prayer `A’.

¶47

( ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. )

¶48

¶49

sga/-

Sayara Begum Shaikh Kalim and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sayara Begum Shaikh Kalim and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Ishrat Hussain S/O Mohammad Hussain Vs the State of Mah

Sanjay Bhagwan Chaudhari and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shaikh Mansoor Shaikh Maddu Vs Zaidabee Shaikh Maddu and Another

Ram Gahininath Bodkhe and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Ashwinikumar Bhimashankar Jujgar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Chandrakant Tanhaji Pawar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another