Allowed

Afzal Ibrahim Shaikh and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC8 Aug 2014WP/2872/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Five writ petitions filed for quashing criminal complaints arising from matrimonial disputes where the complainant filed sections 326, 323, 498A, 504, and 506 IPC. The High Court allowed the petitions, quashing the complaints in view of the settlement of all disputes by mutual consent of the parties, relying on Narinder Singh judgment.

What did the court decide?

The complaints were quashed and the writ petitions were allowed.

Afzal Ibrahim Shaikh and Ors. Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

(WP 2869 of 2014, 2871 of 2014, 2872 of 2014, 2873 of 2014, 2874 of 2014)

¶3

vat

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION No. 2869 OF 2014

¶6

Amjad Abrar Hussain Sayyed & Ors. ….Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ….Respondents

¶7

WITH

¶8

WRIT PETITION No.2871 OF 2014

¶9

Shakir Khaibar Khan and Ors. ...Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents

¶10

WITH

¶11

WRIT PETITION No.2872 OF 2014

¶12

Afzal Ibrahim Shaikh and Ors. ...Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents

¶13

WITH

¶14

WRIT PETITION No. 2873 OF 2014

¶15

Asif Agarbattiwala and Ors. ...Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION No.2874 OF 2014 Shakir Khaibar Khan and Ors. ...Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents

¶16

1/3

¶17

¶18

(WP 2869 of 2014, 2871 of 2014, 2872 of 2014, 2873 of 2014, 2874 of 2014)

¶19

¶20

Mr. Ayaz Khan with Ms. Zehra Charania for Petitioners Mrs. M.M. Deshmukh-APP for the State Mr.Amin Solkar with Mr. Husen Shaikh for Respondent No.2 **********

¶21

CORAM : V. M. KANADE , & P.D. KODE, JJ.

¶22

DATE : AUGUST 8, 2014

¶23

P.C. :

¶24

All these five petitions have been filed by the Petitioners for quashing the respective complaints filed by them against each other. One complaint has been filed by wife under section 326, 323, 498A, 504, 506(II) r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶25

We have asked Mrs. Deshmukh, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State to talk to the Complainant and find out whether the consent has been given by willing or not. We are informed by Mrs.Deshmukh that she has given her consent willingly and since all the disputes between the parties have been settled. It appears that on account of the dispute between the Complainant- Sumira Amjad Sayyed and her husband Amjad Sayyed, there were disputes between her brothers and her in-laws which has resulted in filing of complaint and cross complaints.

¶26

Now the parties have decided to settle all the disputes. In view of the ratio of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh & others V. State of Punjab and another [2014 AIR SCW 2065] , the Apex Court has held that if there is dispute between the parties is a personal one and if the dispute is settled by consent of

2/3

Vaishali Tikam

(WP 2869 of 2014, 2871 of 2014, 2872 of 2014, 2873 of 2014, 2874 of 2014)

¶31

parties then, there is no impediment to quash the complaint by the High Court while exercising its inherent jurisdiction under section 482 of Cr.P.C. or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petitions are, accordingly, allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) in each petitions and are disposed of.

¶32

3/3

Afzal Ibrahim Shaikh and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Afzal Ibrahim Shaikh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saquib Abdul Hamid Nachan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mukhtar Ibrahim Talgharkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sunil Sunderlal Agarwal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Premkumar Ramlakhan Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Nelson Kenny Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mahesh Kumar Goenka Vs Citibank N.A. and Ors.