Allowed

Shaikh Saddam S/O. Sattar and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC13 Nov 2019APPLN/3190/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a quashing application under CrPC regarding an FIR for matrimonial and child marriage offences, the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad, held that relief should be granted as the parties had settled the dispute, terms of compromise were produced, and cohabitation resumed.

What did the court decide?

The criminal application is allowed and the impugned FIR is quashed in terms of prayer clause (B).

Shaikh Saddam S/O. Sattar and Others Vs the State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

954 Cri Application 3190 of 2019.odt

¶3

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3190 OF 2019

¶5

1] Shaikh Saddam S/o Sattar, Age: 27 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Hol Tq. Kaij, Dist. Beed.

¶6

2] Shaikh Sattar s/o Yusuf, Age: 53 years, Occ. Labour, R/o. as above.

¶7

3] Shaikh Nazmum w/o Sattar, Age: 50 years, Occ. Household, R/o. as above.

¶8

4] Shaikh Sultan S/o Sattar, Age: 30 years, Occ. Labour, R/o. as above.

¶9

5] Ayesha @ Bismilla w/o Sultan Shaikh, Age: 28 years, Occ. Labour, R/o. as above.

¶10

6] Shaikh Sardar S/o Sattar, Age: 28 years, Occ. Labour, R/o. as above.

¶11

7] Guljan @ Gulbadan W/o Sardar Shaikh, Age: 26 years, Occ. Labour, R/o. as above.

¶12

8] Shaikh Sajjad s/o Sattar, Age: 26 years, Occ. Labour, R/o. as above.

¶13

9] Kajal @ Afsana W/o Sajjad Shaikh, Age: 24 years, Occ. Labour, R/o. as above.

¶14

10] Rehana W/o Hasan Shaikh, Age: 41 years, Occ. Household, R/o. as above.

¶15

¶16

954 Cri Application 3190 of 2019.odt

¶17

11] Haleema W/o Yusuf Shaikh, Age: 80 years, Occ. Household, R/o. as above. ... APPLICANTS

¶18

V E R S U S

¶19

1] The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station, Shivaji Nagar, Beed. Tq. and Dist. Beed. 2] Margina Saddam Shaikh, Age: 23 years, Occu:- Service, R/o. Police Colony, Balepeer, Beed, Dist. Beed. ... RESPONDENTS

¶20

Mr. K. J. Suryawanshi, Advocate for Applicants. Mr. D. R. Kale, APP for Respondent No.1 / State. Mr. T. J. Momin, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

¶21

CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE & S. M. GAVHANE, JJ. DATE : 13^th November, 2019.

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT: ( Per T. V. Nalawade, J. )

¶23

. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard both the sides for final disposal.

¶24

2 The proceeding is filed for relief of quashing of FIR No.173 of 2019, registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station, District

¶25

¶26

954 Cri Application 3190 of 2019.odt

¶27

Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 494, 323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 9 and 10 of the Protection of Child Marriage Act, 2007.

¶28

3 During arguments, the learned counsels for Applicants

¶29

and the learned counsel for Respondent No.2 submitted that the parties have settled the dispute. The affidavit and terms of compromise are produced on record. It appears that the Respondent No.2 has returned to the matrimonial house and there is resumption of cohabitation. In view of these circumstances and in view of the nature of allegations, this Court holds that relief needs to be granted. In the result, the following order is passed:

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

I. The application is allowed.

¶32

II. Relief is granted in terms of prayer clause (B).

¶33

III. Rule is made absolute on those terms.

¶34

ndm

Shaikh Saddam S/O. Sattar and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaikh Saddam S/O. Sattar and Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh S/O. Appa Sathe and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shankar Baburao Kudhande and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ram Vishwnath Bhande and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Prakash S/O. Dhoman Salunke (Patil) Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Swapnil S/O. Kisan Gawali Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Yuvraj S/O. Sheshrao Ranveer and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.