Allowed

Dr. Laxmikant Bhagwat Kawtekwar and Other v. the State of Maharashtra and Other

Bombay HC12 Apr 2016APPLN/822/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a Criminal Application for quashing criminal proceedings initiated against the applicant's wife (respondent no.3) for offences under Sections 498-A and others of the IPC. The Court allowed the application and quashed the proceedings in view of a settlement reached between the husband and wife agreeing to reconcile their matrimonial differences.

What did the court decide?

The criminal proceedings initiated in pursuance to FIR No.123/2015 for offences under ss.498-A, 323, 452, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC stand quashed.

Dr. Laxmikant Bhagwat Kawtekwar and Other Vs the… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

Cr.Appln.822/16

¶2

- 1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.822/2016

¶6

1] Dr.Laxmikant Bhagwat Kawtekwar, age 33 yrs., occu.Medical Practitioner,

¶7

2] Bhavna w/o Bhagwat Kawtekwar, age 55 yrs., occu.household,

¶8

3] Bhagwat Govind Kawtekwar, age 60 yrs., occu.retired,

¶9

All r/o Flat No.301, Silver Grest,
Parmarnagar, Fatima Nagar, Pune.

¶10

4] Srinivas Bhgwat Kawtekwar, age 26 yrs., occu.service, r/o at present at Reliance Industries Plant, at Bhaduch, Gujrath.

¶11

5] Archana w/o Ravindra, age 35 yrs., occu.service,

¶12

6] Ravindra s/o Ajay, age 37 yrs., occu.service,

¶13

Applicant Nos.5 & 6 r/o 2-4-123/3/301,
Swaroop Nagar, Uppal, Uppal.
Rangareddy, 500039, Andhra Pradesh.

¶14

...Applicants..

¶15

Versus

¶16

1] The State of Maharashtra.

¶17

Cr.Appln.822/16

¶18

- 2 -

¶19

2] The Police Inspector, Palam Police Station, Palam. Dist.Parbhani.

¶20

3] Supriya w/o Laxmikant Kawtekwar, age 31 yrs., occu.Doctor, r/o Palam Tq.Palam Dist.Parbhani.

¶21

...Respondents...

¶22

 .....

¶23

Shri Shaikh Mobin, Advocate for applicants.
Shri K.S. Patil, APP for respondent nos.1 & 2.
Shri D.M. Shinde, Advocate for respondent no.3.

¶24

 .....

¶25

CORAM: R.M. BORDE &

¶26

 K.L. WADANE, JJ.

¶27

DATE: 12.04.2016

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Borde, J.)

¶29

1]Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard

¶30

finally with the consent of learned counsel for the
parties.

¶31

2]This is a petition presented by the applicant
no.1 – husband and the in-laws of the respondent no.3 –

¶32

wife of the applicant no.1, praying for quashment of the
criminal proceedings initiated pursuant to lodging of the
First Information Report No.123/2003 at Police Station,
Palam on 14.11.2015 for commission of offences punishable
u/ss.498-A, 323, 452, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal

¶33

Cr.Appln.822/16

¶34

- 3 -

¶35

Code. The respondent no.3 is legally wedded wife of the
petitioner no.1 and the marriage was solemnized in the
year 2015. There was some matrimonial disharmony between
the parties on account of certain minor issues. The

¶36

husband and the wife had decided to settle their
differences and the wife, who was residing separately,
has agreed to join the matrimonial company of the
husband.

¶37

3]The terms of the settlement arrived at between
the applicant no.1 – Laxmikant Bhagwat Kawtekwar and the
respondent no.3 - his wife Supriya w/o Laxmikant
Kawtekwar, are placed on record and those are marked as
Exhibit X for identification. The respondent no.3 has
agreed to join the matrimonial company of the applicant
no.1 and has further agreed not to prosecute the criminal
case initiated in pursuance to the lodging of the First
Information Report on 14.11.2015.

¶38

4]Apart from above, the respondent no.3 has agreed
to withdraw Miscellaneous Civil Application No.157/2015
pending before this Court seeking transfer of the Hindu
Marriage Petition No.442/2015, which has been lodged in
the Family Court at Pune. The applicant no.1 has agreed

¶39

- 4 -

¶40

to withdraw the Hindu marriage Petition No.442/2015
presented at Family Court at Pune and also the Criminal
Case No.860/2014 presented at Pune. The respondent no.3
– wife has also agreed to tender an application seeking
withdrawal of the complaint / application No.205/2015
presented by her at the office of the Superintendent of
Police, Mahila Cell, Parbhani, alongwith the notices
dated 5.10.2015 and 5.11.2015 and other complaints /
applications filed by her against the husband.

¶41

5] In view of the settlement reached between the parties, it is desirable to direct quashment of the criminal proceedings initiated at the instance of the respondent no.3 in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Gian Singh V/s State of Punjab & another reported at (2012) 10 Supreme Court

¶42

Cases 303. Since the parties have arrived at the
settlement, there is no propriety in permitting
continuation of the criminal proceedings initiated at the
instance of the respondent no.3 – wife.

¶43

6]In view of above, the application is allowed.
The criminal proceedings, initiated in pursuance to
lodging of the FIR No.123/2015 registered at Police

¶44

Cr.Appln.822/16

¶45

Station, Palam Dist.Parbhani, for the offences punishable
u/ss.498-A, 323, 452, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal
Code, stand quashed. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

¶46

(K.L. WADANE, J.) (R.M. BORDE, J.)

¶47

ndk/ cr1241612.doc

Dr. Laxmikant Bhagwat Kawtekwar and Other v. the State of Maharashtra and Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Laxmikant Bhagwat Kawtekwar and Other v. the State of Maharashtra and Other

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

The Vidharbha Irrigation Development Corporation through Its Executive Engineer Bhaskar Pandharinat Vs Ramesh Mohan Ade and Others

Shriniwas Prabhakar Karve Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kisanrao Manikrao Khopade and Another Vs Vidya Wardhini Sabha Dhule and Another

Shriniwas Prabhakar Karve Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Shriniwas Prabhakar Karve Vs Swadhin Kshatriya and Others

Dr. Vandana W/O. Bibhishan Garje Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.