The High Court quashed criminal complaints filed under various IPC provisions after finding that the parties had amicably settled their disputes and the complainant had no objection to the quashing of the complaints.
Quashing of the criminal complaints and disposal of the writ petitions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1/3
WP/3080/2016 WITH WP/3107/2016
BDPPS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3080 OF 2016
Mr. Siddharth Prabhat Chhabra & Ors …. Petitioners.
V/s
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ….. Respondents.
WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3107 OF 2016
Mrs. Chetna Parag Agarwal and Anr. …..Petitioners. V/s
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ….. Respondents.
Mr. Satyam R. Dubey for the Petitioners in both the above Writ Petitions.
Mr. K.V. Saste, APP for the State in Writ Petition No.3080 of 2016.
Mrs. S.V. Sonawane for the State in Writ Petition No.3107 of 2016.
Mr. J.S. Sharma for Respondent No.2 in both the above Writ Petitions. ----
2/3
WP/3080/2016 WITH WP/3107/2016
CORAM: V. M. KANADE &
Ms. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ.
DATE: 16th December, 2016
P.C.:-
1] Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.2.
2] Both these Petitions have been filed for quashing the criminal complaint filed by Respondent No.2 for the offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 149, 354, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3] Parties have amicably settled all their disputes which are pending against each other. Petitioners are in-laws of the complainant's sister. Divorce proceedings were filed by her sister against her husband and those proceedings have been settled. All the parties are present in Court.
4] We have interviewed Respondent No.2. She has stated that she has no objection if the complaint is quashed. Respondent No.2's sister has received an amount of Rs 10 lakhs towards permanent alimony.
5] Taking into consideration all these facts, in our view, quashing of the complaint is in the best interest of the parties. In view of the ratio
3/3
WP/3080/2016 WITH WP/3107/2016
of the judgment in B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana1 , there is no impediment in quashing this complaint.
6] Both these Writ Petitions are therefore allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and disposed of.
1 AIR 2003 SC 1386
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal complaint be quashed given the parties' amicable settlement.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S. Joshi Vs. State of HaryanaRelied on¶30
AIR 2003 SC 1386 · Who else cites this
Siddharth Prabhat Chhabra & Ors.
Chetna Parag Agarwal and Anr.
The State of Maharashtra and Anr.
V.M. Kanade
Nutar D. Sardessai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
