Allowed

Wasim Ahmed Shabbir Ansari and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Dec 2016WP/3250/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed a criminal complaint under sections 498-A and 406 IPC against the petitioners. The complainant, who was present, had no objection and had re-married, leading the court to find that quashing was in the best interest of the wife applying the B. S. Joshi ratio.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed and the criminal complaint was quashed.

Wasim Ahmed Shabbir Ansari and Ors. Vs the State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

spb/

¶2

pr7wp3250-16.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 3250 OF 2016

¶5

Mr. Wasim Ahmed Shabbir Ansari & Ors. … Petitioners.

¶6

V/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents.

¶8

¶9

Miss. Tahera Abdul Rashid Qureshi, Advocate for the Petitioner.

¶10

Dr. F.R. Shaikh, APP for the State. Mr. Vipan B. Kumar, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.

¶11

¶12

CORAM : V. M. KANADE AND Ms.NUTAN D.SARDESSAI,JJ.

¶13

DATE : 22^nd DECEMBER, 2016

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

1 Not on Board. Mentioned. Taken up on production board.

¶16

2 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.2- complainant.

¶17

3 This petition is filed for quashing the criminal complaint filed by Respondent No.2 against the Petitioner for

1/2

Borey

pr7wp3250-16.odt

spb/

the offence punishable under sections 498-A & 406 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

4 Respondent No.2-complainant is present in the court. She has stated that she has no objection if the complaint filed by her is quashed. Since the parties have amicably settled the dispute and Respondent No.2 has re-married thereafter, we are satisfied that quashing of the criminal complaint is in the best interest of the wife. Therefore, the ratio of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of B. S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana & Anr. , reported in AIR 2003 Supreme Court 1386, would squarely apply to the present case. It is, therefore, submitted that the petition be allowed by quashing the criminal complaint. Normally this court is reluctant to quash the proceedings at the production stage. However, since we are informed that Respondent No.2 could appear before us with great difficulty as she is re-married, we are inclined to take up the matter for final disposal.

¶24

5 Therefore, the writ petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and the same is disposed of accordingly.

¶25

(Ms.NUTAN D.SARDESSAI,J) (V.M.KANADE,J)

¶26

2/2

¶27

Borey

Wasim Ahmed Shabbir Ansari and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Wasim Ahmed Shabbir Ansari 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

Ujjwal Vittalrao Deshmukh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahatma Laxmanji Arya Education Public Charitable Trust, Panchgani Vs Bombay Environment Action Group and Anr.

Vikram Sharad Jogdand Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shri Jayant Narayan Thorat Vs General Manager, National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Shri. Ashok Namdev Kamble Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Dhanaji Dinkar Pisal through Poa Nitin D. Pisal and Anr. Vs the Block Development Officer and Ors.