Quashed

Gulab S/O Kisan Rathod and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC18 Dec 2015APPLN/6719/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal application filed to quash FIR registered for offences under IPC 341, 323, 504, 307 r/w 34. Court considered settlement affidavit by original complainant (applicant's wife) and circumstances. Held settlement acceptable despite Section 307 due to parties being husband and wife with no objection.

What did the court decide?

FIR bearing No. I-246/2015 registered with MIDC. CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad is quashed and set aside.

Gulab S/O Kisan Rathod and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

1 cri apln 6719.15

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6719 OF 2015

¶4

Gulab S/o Kisan Rathod and others .. Applicants

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents

¶7

Shri Murlidhar S. Karad, Advocate for Applicants. Shri M. M. Nerlikar, A.P.P. for the Respondent No. 1. Shri S. B. Solanke, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2.

¶8

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA V. K. JADHAV, JJ.

¶9

DATE : 18TH DECEMBER, 2015.

¶10

PER COURT :

¶11

. The present application is filed for quashing the F.I.R. bearing Crime No. I-246/2015 registered with MIDC. CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 307 r/w Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The respondent No. 2, the original complainant has filed affidavit on record stating that, they have now settled the matter and the complaint in question is result of misunderstanding and has no objection if the complaint is quashed.

¶12

The applicant No. 1 and respondent No. 2 are present before the Court. The respondent No. 2 admits the contents of the affidavit filed. She is identified by her advocate.

¶13

2 cri apln 6719.15

¶14

Though, an offence punishable U/Sec. 307 of the I. P. Code is one of heinous nature, this Court can entertain the request of settlement in exceptional cases. The considerations would be the stage at which the said settlement has taken place, the probability of conviction U/Sec. 307, the relation of the parties, as has been held by the Apex Court in a case of Narendra Singh V/s. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 . In the present case also, the charges are not yet framed. The accused No. 1 i. e. the applicant No. 1 and the respondent No. 2 are husband and wife. It is stated that, the matter is settled between them and they are residing together. To maintain cordial relations also the settlement can be accepted. Considering the complaint filed, the chances of conviction U/Sec. 307 of the I. P. Code are also remote. Considering the aforesaid conspectus of the matter we are inclined to accept the settlement.

¶15

In light of above, the F.I.R. bearing No. I-246/2015 registered with MIDC. CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 307 r/w Sec. 34 of the I. P. Code is quashed and set aside.

¶16

The criminal application is accordingly disposed of.

¶17

[ V. K. JADHAV, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]

¶18

bsb/Dec. 15

Gulab S/O Kisan Rathod and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulab S/O Kisan Rathod 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

Haridas S/O Kundlik Pokale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Virendra Bhaskarrao Wagh and Ors. Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Ashok Gulab Vaswani Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajesh S/O Haribhau Umbarkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another