Allowed

Rupesh Yashwant Pawar v. Pooja Rupesh Pawar and Anr.

Bombay HC3 Mar 2020WP/122/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court discussed the dissolution of a marriage by mutual consent under the Hindu Marriage Act and the filing of an FIR by the respondent during the matrimonial disputes. It ordered the quashing of the FIR due to the settlement.

What did the court decide?

The Rule was made absolute quashing the FIR registered under section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act

Rupesh Yashwant Pawar Vs Pooja Rupesh Pawar and Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

rsk

¶2

503-WP-122-20.doc

¶3

1 / 2

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.122 OF 2020

¶6

Rupesh Yashwant Pawar

¶7

...Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

Pooja Rupesh Pawar and Anr.

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

Mr. Raviraj S. Gamare for the Petitioner.
Pooja S. Agrawal for Respondent No.1.
Dr. F. R. Shaikh, APP for the Respondent/State.

¶12

CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI,

¶13

 ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE &
 N. R. BORKAR, J.
DATE : 3/3/2020.

¶14

P.C.:

¶15

.Petitioner and respondent No.1 were parties to Marriage
Petition No.309/2008 on the file of Civil Judge Senior Division, Thane.
Through mediation compromise has been arrived at and parties are getting
their marriage dissolved under section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955 on 19/3/2020.

¶16

2.Out of matrimonial dispute only Respondent No.1 had filed
FIR leading to registration of RCC Case No.312/2015 under section 3 of the
Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other
Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013.

¶17

3.In view of settlement the petitioner and respondent No.1 are
jointly requesting for quashing of FIR.

¶18

rsk

¶19

503-WP-122-20.doc

¶20

2 / 2

¶21

4. As the dispute is arising out of matrimonial discord, learned APP is leaving it to the discretion of the Court to pass suitable orders.

¶22

5. Accepting joint request we make Rule absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶23

(N. R. BORKAR, J.)

¶24

 (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)

Rupesh Yashwant Pawar v. Pooja Rupesh Pawar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupesh Yashwant Pawar v. Pooja Rupesh Pawar 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

Dattatray Pandurang Kedar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bhushan Dattatray Kedar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Lalit Chopra Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shrishail Chandram Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Santosh Gulabrao Pol Vs the State of Maharashtra

Chandar Armogam Naykar @ Ganesh Mani Kondiram Vs the State of Maharashtra