Allowed

Sagar Rajpal Zate and Others v. State of Maharashtra, P.S.O. P.S. Ashti, Wardha

Bombay HC27 Apr 2016APL/269/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Nagpur exercised powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings initiated against several applicants based on a domestic dispute between the applicants and the complainant, who was the applicant's wife. The court noted that the dispute had been amicably settled and the parties decided to live separately following a mutual divor

What did the court decide?

The criminal proceedings bearing RCC No. 28/2014 were quashed and an end was given to them.

Sagar Rajpal Zate and Others Vs State of Maharashtra… — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

apl.269.16

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 269/2016

¶5

1. Sagar Rajpal Zate Aged 26 years, occupation: Agri.

¶6

1. Rajpal Awchitrao Zate Aged 50 years, occu; Labour

¶7

1. Vishal Rajpal Zate Aged 21 years, occu; Agril.

¶8

1. Sau.Ramabai Rajpal Zate Aged 47 years, occu; Agri.

¶9

Nos. 1 to 4 R/o Bagapur, Tah. Chandur Railway Dist.Amravati.

¶10

1. Bhagwantrao Deorao Mundre Aged 47 years, occu; Agril.

¶11

1. Rahul Bhagwantrao Mundre Aged 25 years, occu: Agri.

¶12

1. Sumed Bhagwantrao Mundre Aged 21 years, occu: Agril.

¶13

Nos. 5 to 7 R/o Raghunathpur Tah. Tiwsa, Dist. Amravati.

¶14

1. Sanjay Ramdas Nakhale Aged 30 years, occu; Agri.

¶15

1. Niranjan Gopalrao Zate Aged 54 years, occu; Agri.

¶16

Nos. 8 and 9 R/o Dalpatpur Tah.Ashti, Dist. Wardha.

¶17

1. Priya alias Rani Sagar Zate Aged 24 years, occu; NIL

¶18

apl.269.16

¶19

¶20

R/o Sidhartha Dalpatrao Gadling Belora Tah.Ashti,Dist.Wardha. ..APPLICANTS

¶21

v e r s u s

¶22

State of Maharashtra Police Station officer Police Station Ashti, dist. Wardha. .. ...NON-APPLICANT (RESPONDENT)

¶23

…........................................................................................................................ Mr. A.B.Tikle, Advocate for the applicant nos. 1 to 9 Mr. P.M.Gaikwad, Advocate for applicant no.10 Mr. M.K.Pathan, A.P.P. for Respondent -State

¶24

CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & Mrs. SWAPNA JOSHI,JJ . DATED : 27^th April, 2016

¶25

JUDGMENT: (PER MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, J.)

¶26

Rule . Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned counsel for the parties finally, by consent.

¶27

2. The applicants have approached this Court for quashing proceedings bearing RCC No.28/2014 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ashti, Dist.Wardha against the applicant nos. 1 to 9 registered on the basis of charge-sheet bearing No.19/2014.

¶28

3. The applicant no. 1 was married with applicant no.10 on 28.3.2014 at Belora, Tah.Ashti, Dist.Wardha as per the customary rites prevailing in their religion.

¶29

4. On account of some family dispute, the applicant no.1 and applicant no.10 started living separately from 30^th March,2014.

¶30

apl.269.16

¶31

¶32

5. On 20.5.2014, the applicant no.10 lodged complaint against the applicant nos. 1 to 9 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ashti under section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. vide Crime No.32/2014 u/ss. 498A r/ws. 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Prevention of Dowry Act.

¶33

6. Thereafter, the relatives and friends of applicant no.1 and applicant no.10 made several attempts for reconciliation. However, the same did not yield results. The applicant no. 1 and applicant no.10 have filed a mutual divorce petition before the learned Civil Judge, Sr.Dn. Wardha and, accordingly, proceedings bearing Hindu Marriage Petition No.251/2015 was registered and it was allowed by the learned Civil Judge on 19.1.2016 and the marriage between the applicant no.1 and applicant no.10 is dissolved, on 28^th March 2014.

¶34

7. Thus, the applicant no.1 and applicant no. 10 have settled their dispute amicably and now they have decided to live separately.

¶35

8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003) 4 SCC 675, has held that if the matrimonial dispute has been settled between the parties, this Court can exercise the powers u/s. 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash and give an end to the criminal proceedings.

¶36

9. As the matter is amicably settled between the parties and they have decided to live separately, we find that this Court should exercise powers u/s 482 ofCr.P.C. and give an end to the criminal proceedings.

¶37

apl.269.16

¶38

¶39

10. The applicant nos. 1 and applicant no. 10 are personally

¶40

present in the Court and they reiterate about the settlement. Rule is therefore made absolute in terms of prayer clause (1) of the Application.

¶41

JUDGE JUDGE

¶42

sahare

Sagar Rajpal Zate and Others v. State of Maharashtra, P.S.O. P.S. Ashti, Wardha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sagar Rajpal Zate and Others v. State of Maharashtra, P.S.O. P.S. Ashti, Wardha

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

State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Bramhapuri, Chandrapur Vs Umesh S/O Madhukar Raut

Abdul Asif Abdul Kadir and Another Vs State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Balapur, Akola and Others

Akash S/O Ramdas More and Another Vs State of Maharashtra, through Superintendent of Police, Akola and Another

Rajabhau S/Op Rambhau Shekokar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Yavatmal City, Yavatmal

Pratik S/O Pawan Borele and Another Vs State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Pandharkawada, Yavatmal

Archana and Katrina Gorakshan Trust and Animal Rehabilitation Home through Its President Av Paradha Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary, Marketing Dept. Mumbai and Others