Petitioners sought to quash an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC. The parties jointly informed that a divorce proceeding had settled and was converting to divorce by mutual consent. With the wife accepting the terms, the rule was made absolute to quash the FIR.
Rule made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) to quash the FIR.
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.
12-wp-265.2019.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 265 OF 2019
Mr. Anirban Shovan Basu and anr. … Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra and Anr.
… Respondents
Mr. Mohd Shine K. for the Petitioners.
Ms. S.D. Shinde, APP for the respondent no. 1 State.
Mr. Siddh Vaidy a/w Mr. Sujit Saho for respondent no.2.
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ. DATE : MARCH 01, 2019
P.C. :
Petitioner no.1 husband and respondent no.2 wife jointly seek quashing of FIR which is under sections 498A, 406, 504, 506 an 34 IPC.
No.16 of 2016 on 11/1/2019.
1/2
nilegaonkar
12-wp-265.2019.odt
(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)
(B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
2/2
nilegaonkar
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to quash the FIR under sections 498A, 406, 504, 506 and 34 IPC in view of a settlement?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mr. Anirban Shovan Basu
anr
State of Maharashtra
anr
B.P. DHARMADHIKARI
REVATI MOHITE DERE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
